Pant-demonium breaks loose, cont’d

Outrage continues to spread over Roy Pearson, Jr.’s $65 million suit against a Washington, D.C. Korean dry cleaner over a lost pair of suit pants (Apr. 26, May 1). The Washington Post editorially wonders whether Pearson should continue in his position as an administrative law judge given the “serious questions” raised by the case “about his judgment and temperament”. (“Kick in the Pants”, May 3). Associated Press coverage is circulating worldwide: Lubna Takruri, “Judge sues cleaner for $65M over pants”, AP/Kansas City Star, May 3. And Alex Spillius in London’s Daily Telegraph (“Judge sues dry cleaners over lost trousers, May 3) notes that Pearson

reached the figure of $67,292,000 as follows: Washington’s consumer protection law provides for damages of $1,500 per violation per day. Mr Pearson started multiplying: 12 violations over 1,200 days, times three defendants (the Chungs and their son)….

Mr Pearson has set the Chungs and their lawyers a long list of questions, which includes: “Please identify by name, full address and telephone number, all cleaners known to you on May 1, 2005 in the District of Columbia, the United States and the world that advertise ‘SATISFACTION GUARANTEED’,” according to the Washington Post.


  • This is the first time I heard of such a lawsuit. If only I met roy pearson sooner I would be 65Millions dollar richer myself. I am an asian american and I understand what the Chungs are going through to make it in America. I too have a small business trying to cater to persons like pearson who dont want us to make it to the top. I think right now the Chungs need a lot of american support to let people know the minorities will not be taken advantage of NO MORE.

  • It is not his fault. Blame it on a troubled childhood. Imagine growing up with the name Royal Person (Roy L Pearson) and not thinking your deserve special treatment.

    What were his parents thinking?

  • I have followed this story since reading about it a few weeks ago. This judge is abusing the system, and making a mockery of the American judicial process. He should be disbarred, removed from his position as a judge, and forced to pay the attorneys fees of the defendants. Having said that, I am also saddened to see numerous comments from readers who see this lawsuit as an example of why our legal system is “broken.” Being an attorney for nearly 15 years, I would emphatically say that this type of lawsuit is very uncommon (thus the reason we are reading about it here). We live in a great country, and despite some loose cannons, we have the best legal system in the world. It is a system that gives everyone a voice–even those who seek to abuse that privilege. Yes, that opens the doors to idiots like Roy Pearson, who make a mockery of what we hold so dear, but that is a price we pay for the freedom to have our voice heard. Before you write the system off as being “broken,” please allow for the possibility (or even certainty) that Judge Pearson will not only lose his lawsuit, but will also likely suffer professional consequences as well. Before this is over, we may well look at this case as an example of the system doing exactly what it should do: let Judge Pearson be heard, deny him his outrageous demands, and then make him compensate the unfortunate defendants for what he put them through.

  • It’s embarassing to think that this guy represents the legal system that our young men and women are defending. It’s gone haywire… and should never have gotten this far. The court system should have thrown this out long ago. I hope that ‘Judge’ Pearson has to pay for the Chung’s legal fees from day one, as well as damages for the anxiety he has caused them over a lousy pair of pants.

  • Troy,

    The system MIGHT work to satisfaction in this most incrfedibly extreme of cases… but even then, it is doubtful, and there are literally hundreds of othr such cases chronicled here (albeit with less stupendously extreme $s attachd to them) where the system has completely failed.

    Our system IS broken – this case is simply one example of thousands (at least), not the sole proof.