Print Columns   |   Web Chats   |   Blog Archives   |  

Pants Update: The Dry Cleaners Shuts Down

Roy Pearson, the D.C. administrative law judge whose $67 million lawsuit against his neighborhood dry cleaners turned into a worldwide lesson in how one obsessed person can hijack the American legal system, lost his case in court, but today delivered the crowning blow to the owners of Custom Cleaners:

Bowing to the emotional and financial strains of two years of litigation, Soo and Jin Chung today announced the closing of the dry cleaners that may or may not have lost a pair of Pearson's pants that he put in for a $10 alteration in 2005.

"They were just tired of the whole ordeal," the Chungs' daughter-in-law, Soo Choi, told me today. "A lot of people view this comically because the case is so outrageous, but my mother-in-law has gone down four dress sizes from this whole ordeal. They just want to put this in their past."

In addition to the heavy emotional toll, the lawsuit proved to be a big drag on revenues at Custom Cleaners, located on Bladensburg Road NE. When Pearson first started gathering material for his aggressive legal battle, he posted fliers on light poles all around the Fort Lincoln neighborhood, asking residents if they had been ripped off by Custom and announcing his own displeasure with the service there. Business declined significantly after that and never rebounded, said Choi and the Chungs' lawyer, Christopher Manning.

"You'd think the trial and all the publicity would have a good effect on business," Manning said, "but for a dry cleaner, it really doesn't, because your customers are from the immediate neighborhood."

Public support for the Chungs did come in strong as news coverage of Pearson's wild demands and the D.C. court's failure to nip the case in the bud spread throughout the globe. Both the tort reform lobby and the trial lawyers association denounced Pearson's abuse of the legal system--a rare case of cooperation between sworn enemies. And fundraisers for the Chungs collected enough money--more than $100,000--to cover the family's legal bills.

Pearson last month appealed the Superior Court decision rejecting his suit, but Manning said his firm will handle the appeal for the Chungs without charge.

The Chungs will now work exclusively at their original shop, Happy Cleaners, on Seventh Street NW, across from the D.C. Convention Center. Soo Chung was there this afternoon, mopping the floor, waiting for customers. For the first time in a very long time, she was able to smile about her work. "This is our first store, first job," she told me. "When we came to America, we worked here. Good job. Good store."

By Marc Fisher |  September 19, 2007; 2:20 PM ET
Previous: Redskins: Take All the Pix You Want | Next: A Mayor Tries to Turn Anger Into Resolve

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



I think they gave up too easily. They should sue that SOB judge for pain and suffering for that ridiculous lawsuit, and for slander for putting up those posters. If they don't want to do that then engage the Asian Mafia to whack him. I'm outraged.

Posted by: Sofie McGlumphy | September 19, 2007 3:04 PM

That's just sad! Pearson seems to be a very small person (and I don't mean his pants size!). I hope things improve for the Chungs at the new/old location!

Posted by: tl | September 19, 2007 3:07 PM

The law can sometimes be very corrosive. Pearson knows how to apply the acid.

Posted by: Tupac Goldstein | September 19, 2007 3:07 PM

I 100% agree with Sofie McGlumphy!

Posted by: Mustang Sallie | September 19, 2007 3:10 PM

I do hope that the Chungs will prosper at their other location. Had this crazy person not been a judge himself, would his case have progressed through the legal system as it did? I think not. I wish the Chungs well and if I lived near them, theirs would be my dry cleaner of choice!!

Posted by: What a pity | September 19, 2007 3:11 PM

If any case can serve to sum up the evils of a system in which trial lawyers are free to run amok and abuse the legal system, this case does. It is time for serious efforts to reform the system, one that liberal Democrats swear by since trial lawyers contribute huge amounts to their party. Having the losing party pay the other party's lawyers fees is a start.

Posted by: mhr | September 19, 2007 3:13 PM

We have a man like Pearson where I live. He is a millionaire, and he throws lawsuits like snowballs, mostly at people who have much less in the way of financial resources than he has. He sued a friend of mine for "indirect contempt of court." My friend won and the case was dismissed, but the judge did not award attorney's fees, which came to $3,000. I and others contributed close to $2,000 of that to help them out.

Posted by: NMAIF | September 19, 2007 3:13 PM

If there was justice, Pearson would end up unemployed and forced to take the most menial, low-paying, back-breaking job in the city. What a dirtbag.

Posted by: corbett | September 19, 2007 3:13 PM

This makes me sick. Pearson is indeed a very 'small' man. But if the Chungs are happier at their original shop, more power to them. And I doubt Pearson is losing any sleep over all of this.

Posted by: Sick | September 19, 2007 3:15 PM

Can't we find Pearson a mini bike?

Posted by: Stick | September 19, 2007 3:16 PM

Can't sue for pain & suffering in DC.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 19, 2007 3:17 PM

It may be that they'll actually be better off with this new arrangement. The downtown location probably seemed less desirable when they opened in NE, but 9th St in Shaw is probably a much more lucrative neighborhood than out on Bladensburg NE now. Why sweat running two shops when one is in the neighborhood where the deadbeat ex-judge lives. Let's hope it all works out for the best for the Chungs now.

Posted by: Not a Fisher (or Pearson) fan | September 19, 2007 3:18 PM

If that guy Pearson gets his Admin job back then there is no justice in DC. It will just be racial politics as usual. DC is still the laughing stock of American cities and this just proves it more true. It is too bad, because I like the small city neighborhood aspects of DC. I wish it would run itself better.

Posted by: Steven7753 | September 19, 2007 3:19 PM

The number of mentally deranged obsessed people are growing in leaps in bounds that use our legal system to feed their illness. Virginia makes it very hard to bring a law suit against someone for the purpose of recovering your expenses. That needs to change in order to stop people like Pearson. I believe it is time for the English Rule to be part of our legal system.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 3:24 PM

So, Judge Pearson has prevailed and, actually, taken these people to the cleaners. What a sad little person he is. And what a skewed, warped society we have that allows such a person to perpetrate such damage.

Posted by: qrb | September 19, 2007 3:24 PM


It's nice they at least got their legal fees back. Moving out is the best thing. Who'd want to stay in that neighborhood? And who's going to want to set up next dry cleaners there? Seems like the neighborhood is getting what it deserves.

Posted by: smokeclearing | September 19, 2007 3:26 PM

To MHR: Judge pantless represented himself, so I don't see how you can turn this case into an indictment of trial lawyers.

Posted by: Not MHR | September 19, 2007 3:26 PM

We need a new name for the American Justice System. Our system clearly has nothing to do with justice.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 3:27 PM

Pearson is a most contemptable human being. The kind the system needs to put away. If the system cannot police dregs like Pearson its really time for a revolutionary change.

Posted by: Watcher | September 19, 2007 3:27 PM

Hey MHR - I'm a liberal democrat lawyer, and I'm disgusted with this case. I'm glad, however, that this gives you more fodder for partisan ramblings and using one case to generalize the entire American legal system. I mean, when you have no basis for an argument, why not pull out all the stops, go for the gusto, and stoop to attacks based on politics, right? That's not at all a tactic of those "liberal Democrat" lawyers you seem to disdain...

Posted by: Jay | September 19, 2007 3:27 PM

They have public child molester registries, why not one for legal abusers? His actions should follow him to every employer and every community he enters.

Posted by: Pearsona | September 19, 2007 3:32 PM

Pearson is a lowlife leach. He is a hateful, mean, and disturbed individual. I send love and light to the Chungs. You represent and live all that is good about pursuing the American dream.

Posted by: Nina | September 19, 2007 3:33 PM

This is the "poster" case for a loser pays system in civil courts.

Posted by: Steve C. | September 19, 2007 3:35 PM

It would be great--NOT being mean, ironic or hypocritcal or sue-happy here--to have a good lawyer very honestly and diligently sue Pearson for defamation of character, libel, slander, filing a frivilous lawsuit, abuse of the legal system, illegal character assassination and abuse of his bar status and have the Chungs awarded all court costs, all business costs and a couple of million dollars for all that they have lost. And Pearson should be suspended for a long period from practicing law in D.C. But the Chungs honestly, truely need to be compensated for their troubles. Where is the justice in this case?

Posted by: thefrontpage | September 19, 2007 3:38 PM

Don't worry...colbert king still doesn't care about how a black man's obession destroyed a hard working asian family's lives. He's still fuming over Jim Moran's comments about AIPAC.

Posted by: colbertkingisapimp | September 19, 2007 3:39 PM

I am for the judge in this case. The principle is the not the pants. The way he was probably treated. I have have dealing with some (not all) Asians in the drycleaners business and they treat people of color a little differently at times.

They have their American dream and so do we.

Posted by: Nat | September 19, 2007 3:39 PM

Juxtapose this story against the guilty plea of Bill Lerach -- another crook that abused the legal system to the detriment of many. The legal system is horrific. Yes, this jerk judge abused it plenty. But reality is that he was so abusive that it became public. Thousands of small businesses are drowned by abusive legal actions with no effective recourse. If it was just one outrageous judge and just this one couple, maybe we could all let it go. But its not. While the defendants got plenty of public support, the idea that a dry cleaner can get $100k in legal bills over a pair of pants ... its reasonable to question if we are looking at a legal system or a blackmail system. Its the answer that really sucks

Posted by: AL | September 19, 2007 3:41 PM

It is called malicious prosecution - and some non greedy lawyer can take this set of facts and make some money - whatever the insane administrative law judge is worth. It is time for justice and reason to prevail over the law.

Posted by: tom | September 19, 2007 3:41 PM

I would recommend that all business establishments post a sign saying "We have the right to refuse service to anybody, etc."

And then everybody should refuse service to Pearson - no cleaners, restaurants, stores, gas stations, rental cars, ... everybody can tell this A--H--- that he can take his business elsewhere.

Actually, all establishments should do this so he doesn't sue them when he is dissatisfied with there work.

Posted by: SoMD | September 19, 2007 3:43 PM

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Judge Pearson is obviously a power-hungry control freak who has turned corrupt. How sad for the owners of the cleaners and, more importantly, how sad a testament to our legal system.

Posted by: Absolute power corrupts | September 19, 2007 3:45 PM

Blah blah blah...you think this system will ever be reformed? NO! Ask yourself this...when was the last time it was reformed in light of such outrageousness? NEVER! WE are all screwed becuase our so called representatives REALLY represent special interest groups. THAT's we're stuck in Iraq. Even the "Supreme" court struck down the campaign finance law. Arrrgh...sorry...I'm just frustrated.

Posted by: Rock Hoover | September 19, 2007 3:46 PM

Whether individual trial lawyers or the National Association of Trial Lawyers (or is it the Don't Call Us Trial Lawyers Association) objected to this case is irrelevant. The system allowed it. The system should change.

People get mad at trial lawyers not because they are liberals or democrats but because they helped foster the system and have stood in the way of meaningful reform.

Posted by: rob | September 19, 2007 3:46 PM

MHR is a partisan idiot. Most cases clogging the courts involve corporations, which are not represented by the kinds of "trial lawyers" he's ranting about.

And there is no way those corporations would ever go for a loser pays system.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | September 19, 2007 3:46 PM

Steven7753

If DC is the laughing stock why are soo many people moving here that it has become the second most congested city in the US traffic wise? 2.How does a civil case become racist politics? This judge has been stripped of his job as well so no one wins in this. He did not win his law suit, he lost his job, and is the now the epitome of off his rocker. Where did the so called racist politics benefit or come into play? Stop blowing hot air. Until white people clean up their own acts they will continue to sound like complete idiots playing the race card as if they are the victims of a racist society.

Posted by: gdavis4 | September 19, 2007 3:46 PM

If you see tire marks from the same car going forward and backing up, it is because someone like Pearson was crossing.

Posted by: truth1 | September 19, 2007 3:47 PM

The world's tiniest violin is playing for "the way he was treated". Multi-million dollar lawsuits have a way of making the public skeptical of one's "principles".

Posted by: Gnat | September 19, 2007 3:48 PM

Mayor Fenty should personally and publicly intervene to make sure that Pearson never holds another meaningful job until and unless he publicly apologizes and compensates not only the Chungs, but the judicial system. Pearson deserves the public's contempt.

Posted by: Go Get 'em | September 19, 2007 3:49 PM

Civil courts exist as a system of redress. It's about resolution, not justice. If you want justice, go to the Mafia.

Posted by: American Justice System? | September 19, 2007 3:50 PM

This case speaks volumes about the District itself. Why am i not surprised that the same city that would elect and re-elect a crackhead as Mayor, also have an adminsitrative law judge that would abuse the system? One more reason why home rule is a bad idea.

Posted by: sane | September 19, 2007 3:52 PM

gdavis: No call for that comment in this blog. If there is racism in this story, its black v. asian. Go back and sit on the curb.

Posted by: gdavis4 is a nut | September 19, 2007 3:57 PM

I hope this Judge rots in hell

Posted by: Jim | September 19, 2007 3:58 PM

This is just another reason why people distrust lawyers and our legal system. This angered me so much. I hope he gets what is coming, I truly believe in the "you get what you give" mantra, so hopefully he has a miserable time for the rest of his life!!!!!!!

Posted by: EM | September 19, 2007 4:00 PM

the thing is, the system is open so that every defendant cannot turn around and sue the plaintiff if the plaintff loses. This case is the exception that proves the rule that the system generally works. If the loser paid, no one would bring cases unless they were rich are 100% sure they'd win, and that is never (appeals courts exist because judges are juries are fallible). Lots of judges prevent multiple filers from filing (I have seen several courts do this), but everyone has the right to bring a good faith case, and this guy believed he had one, as nuts as he is. He got the opprtunity to prove his case, and he lost. The Chungs got their fees paid which is more than 99.9% of litigants can say (even in cases where statutes provide that the plaintiff gets fees upon prevailing, the cases usually settle with the defendant's paying a lot less in fees to the plaintiff upon the agreement not to appeal. I, a lawyer, have taken substantial fee cuts in this scenario so the case would end. It is a common practice).

And liberal Democrats is a ridiculous categorization, see, e.g. Larry Klayman.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 4:00 PM

Here is how this is about Trial Lawyers as a whole. Its just to dam easy too sue someone over something stupid and there is no real way to fight back against a stupid lawsuit. All the real attempts to pass overall legislation restricting the right to continually appeal or even create idiotic lawsuits are shot down by the trial lobby, which is tied at the hip to the democratic party.
I commend the Trial lobby for attacking this lawsuit, but without substantial legislation, it can easily happen to someone else.

Posted by: Jon | September 19, 2007 4:01 PM

Is anybody surprised here? This is what DC has become. It's lucky for the Chungs that they're not caucasian.

Posted by: Garrett | September 19, 2007 4:01 PM

I think the Pearson's lawsuit was brilliant! It worked! The outrageousness of the whole lawsuit brought attention to his core issue: which is poor customer service!!! I think Fisher himself is way too biased on this episode.

For all of those blasting Pearson, it's important to look at this in a greater context. For anyone working in minority communities, cleaners don't exactly enjoy the best reputations; whether owned by Blacks, whites, Asians, etc.

I think however, that anyone working, worshiping, living, and or socializing in predominantly minority neighborhoods is well aware of tensions especially with Asian shop keepers.(LA riots should have made this clear to everyone)

In addition to wild price deferentials between cleaning women's clothes and male clothes, Pearson's poor experience with the cleaners is probably unfortunately the norm.

What were his options? To try the Better Business Bureau, etc? He probably would not have gotten anywhere with that type of "grievance action." Afterall, the owners of the cleaners gave Pearson's grievance scant attention until he threatened to file a lawsuit. Everyone in this post knows quite well that when there is a dispute with a cleaners, they will deny responsibilities for damage to your clothing.

As far as slander, Pearson was simply relaying his experience with the cleaners; it's not like he made up the ordeal.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:02 PM

Jon, one does not need a lawyer to sue, the plaintiff did not use one, and the defendants did. How again did trial lawyers cause this? Everyone always hates lawyers until they need one.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 4:02 PM

This is typical of folks with money socking it to others. The legal system favors the rich and this dirtbag judge is a prime example. Even though he lost he cost the shop owners a bundle in cost and emotional abuse.

How on earth did this idiot ever become a judge ? Stoning and exile would be too good for him. He epitomizes everything wrong with the legal system.

He should pay for all the legal expenses and a few million more to make sure such travesties don't happen again. He makes DC look like a bunch of idiots and we are just that for putting up with such nonsense.

I vote we bring back cruel and unsual punishment so we can teach these morons not to subvert the legal system.

Posted by: knight-MD | September 19, 2007 4:04 PM

What's wrong with a "loser pays for the winner's lawyer fees" rule? I believe Canada has exactly this system.

Posted by: Dan4 | September 19, 2007 4:07 PM

Best wishes to the Chung. AMEN

Posted by: JC | September 19, 2007 4:09 PM

That worthless scumbag Pearson. I hope he enjoys being known as one of the most dispicable people to ever walk the earth for the rest of his life.

I wonder if he has a girlfriend or wife, or if he ever will.

That would suprise me

Posted by: angry | September 19, 2007 4:10 PM

I am reminded of Lester B. Pearson,the venerated statesman and premier of CAnada. This Pearson seems to have come from altogether different genes. It is a pity.

Posted by: s.divakaran | September 19, 2007 4:10 PM

I am not sure why the dry cleaners did not try and settle this with Pearson before it spiraled downwards before the lawyers involved. Why the arrogance on the part of the shop owners when the age-old adage is "the customer is always right".

Posted by: Kerry | September 19, 2007 4:11 PM

I think the Pearson's lawsuit was brilliant! It worked! The outrageousness of the whole lawsuit brought attention to his core issue: which is poor customer service!!! I think Fisher himself is way too biased on this episode.

For all of those blasting Pearson, it's important to look at this in a greater context. For anyone working in minority communities, cleaners don't exactly enjoy the best reputations; whether owned by Blacks, whites, Asians, etc.

I think however, that anyone working, worshiping, living, and or socializing in predominantly minority neighborhoods is well aware of tensions especially with Asian shop keepers.(LA riots should have made this clear to everyone)

In addition to wild price deferentials between cleaning women's clothes and male clothes, Pearson's poor experience with the cleaners is probably unfortunately the norm.

What were his options? To try the Better Business Bureau, etc? He probably would not have gotten anywhere with that type of "grievance action." Afterall, the owners of the cleaners gave Pearson's grievance scant attention until he threatened to file a lawsuit. Everyone in this post knows quite well that when there is a dispute with a cleaners, they will deny responsibilities for damage to your clothing.

As far as slander, Pearson was simply relaying his experience with the cleaners; it's not like he made up the ordeal.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:11 PM

Man. I'm a nice girl, but I really hate that guy.

Posted by: h3 | September 19, 2007 4:12 PM

The next thing you know, Pearson will tip off ICE about them.

Posted by: Roddy Fischbaum | September 19, 2007 4:15 PM

I do find one bit of irony in all of this. A man from the community (African-American men) most taken advantage of by this swiss cheese of a judicial system is responsible for pointing out to the rest of the world how screwed up it really is.

I do think this outcome is a very bad thing and I hope that the family has success at their NW location.

But it is kinda funny:

Pearson and OJ - showing the world that the emperor has no clothes.

Posted by: Icons Of Irony | September 19, 2007 4:15 PM

Someone brought up the word justice.
The law is not about justice, it is about what is legal.
Very, very different ideas.

Posted by: David | September 19, 2007 4:16 PM

Pearson filed a frivolous lawsuit and committed malicious prosecution and abuse of process. The courts should have dismissed his case and fined him on the initial filing, since he's an attorney and knows better. He certainly should never sit as a judge again, and ought to be disbarred, if not jailed, for abusing the civil court system so egregiously.

Posted by: Sam | September 19, 2007 4:17 PM

Angry,
part of all this story, is that he is broke because he had been through a horrible, long, and financially draining divorce in Virginia. This is why he represented himself in DC. If he had been able to afford a lawyer, I guarantee you none would have brought this suit. I cannot tell you how many whackos, who could afford me, have come in and I told them no way. Lawyers are not the problem, folks. the lawyers don't create the nutjob plaintiffs. People in general are the problem. There a reasonable and unreasonable people in every profession. We all would do well to just relax and step back and let things go.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 4:18 PM

Why hasn't someone worked up a good old fashioned beat down on that "judge"?

Posted by: Dam Man | September 19, 2007 4:19 PM

NAT,
I completely disagree with you and am surprised that you side with the Judge for the reasons you presented. If that is the minimum threshold we use for filing law suits, Minorities, Women, the Handicapped, the overweight, and perhaps some blonds would file millions of suits every day. And I am sure the entire Asian-owned dry cleaners community would sue you for your comment.

There is no reason to side with the judge in this case, even if your assumption that they treated him poorly is correct (for reasons of skin color as you posit, or for anything else - perhaps he was just a jerk in the store). If this were the case, the onus is on the Judge to choose another dry cleaner. There is no reason to file a frivolous law suit and defame the cleaner on the assumption that they are treating you poorly because of your skin color.

I am also black, and have received and witnessed my fair share of what I perceived to be racist actions against me, my family and other, but the resulting action is never an abuse of the legal system - and in this case, discrimination has in no way been proven.

JB


YOU WROTE:
I am for the judge in this case. The principle is the not the pants. The way he was probably treated. I have have dealing with some (not all) Asians in the drycleaners business and they treat people of color a little differently at times.

They have their American dream and so do we.

Posted by: JB | September 19, 2007 4:20 PM

Icon. Compare apples to apples here. OJ getting busted recently is the best kind of justice: it's Karma!! Person's case is about lousy customer service! (nothing more nothing less) There's a big difference in poor customer service and double murder if you didn't know.

For every OJ, there have been years and years of cases like the Jena 6 in Louisiana (LA) where there were wildly different penalties applied for the Black youth than the white youth for the exact same offense (and this all happened after some hung a noose in the school's court yard). Fortunately, the LA appeals court have thrown out more than a few of the charges against the Black youth.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:21 PM

this judge needs to be placed on the space shuttle and left to orbit indefinitely

Posted by: pwaldron | September 19, 2007 4:21 PM

Oh well for them. Dry cleaners like that get over on customers everyday. So they finally got bested by one of their customers. Suck it up!! I say cheers to the Judge!

Posted by: venus31 | September 19, 2007 4:24 PM

To DFT: You sound like my husband and that makes you wrong.

Posted by: WooWoo | September 19, 2007 4:24 PM

David:

excellent point about justice vs. what is legal...I think shows like CSI and Law and Order have thoroughly confused all of us about these concepts..

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:26 PM

People let be real, the cleaners i got to lose my stuff all the time. They make you wait weeks while they try to locate your stuff and if they don't find they only give you back the pennies. The only recourse i had was to stop going to them. This crap happens all the time. I really don't feel for them at all. Thank god for act of suing..

Posted by: ollie | September 19, 2007 4:26 PM

Pearson is an a s s h o l e.

Posted by: Karl | September 19, 2007 4:26 PM

How about a class action suit against Pearson for the tax dollars that have been squandered on this case?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 4:27 PM

Woo:

I would imagine I look better than your husband; but he sounds as equally smart (LOL)...what am I wrong about...please elaborate?

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:27 PM

DFT - Obviously you are wrong because you are looking at this with unemotional, level-headed intellect. Geeeze oh man, man! I have to remind hubster of that all the time, right after I call him Mr. Husband-Sir.

Posted by: WooWoo | September 19, 2007 4:30 PM

This is why we need tort reform.

Posted by: j.g. | September 19, 2007 4:30 PM

Woo-

How else to look at it? That's really how any judge or jury is suppose to look at it. It's not their job (whoever is reviewing the facts) to look at this emotionally. Emotions would bring race into the equation when really there is no evidence that race was a fundamental issue.

The only issue here was poor customer service; that's it.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:33 PM

It was a joke - these posts are all emotionally charged. I do feel bad that someone is emotionally suffering, but hey, the rest is business.

Posted by: WooWoo | September 19, 2007 4:35 PM

LOL. I just realized that..(smile)

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:37 PM

dft and that part of a horse's anatomy covered by its tail equal one and the same.

Posted by: Another Excuse | September 19, 2007 4:39 PM

lol.

i can't believe how long it took for iraq to come up in this message board...

the trolls are getting lazy.

You can say what you like about special interest groups and I'd be inclined to agree. But why must you warp every f-ing topic into a 'that's why we are in iraq'...

"i wanted fries with that! you know this is why we are still in iraq! Evil people who don't agree with me bla bla bla"

The more I read these post the more I think democracy might be a BAD thing... i mean... you people actually get to vote. scary.

I like the suggestion of giving Pearson a scarlet letter, someone actually related this to child molestation... we should brand him. Positively 17th century of you.

Every time something bad happens all these reactionary wonks, claw onto the internet and scratch around a message board with wonderfully useless insights, theories insults and. Sentence fragments.

And if you don't like what i wrote, then it probably will have a profound effect on your bowels unless you forward this post to 10 of your closest friends, one person you don't like and 2 people who you think look like a celebrity.

Now if you did like what i wrote, well, Gob Bless You, that might be even scarier. :)

Now get to it.

Posted by: jebus | September 19, 2007 4:40 PM

They should make Pearson work for the Chungs until he fulfills the same amount of money he was suing them for in the drycleaners. Thay would be poetic justice. He can't work as a lawyer anymore so WHY NOT!!!!!

Posted by: Susan | September 19, 2007 4:41 PM

Two words folks; "machine washable".

Do we really need dry cleaners anyway?

Posted by: Get with the program | September 19, 2007 4:41 PM

Judge Pearson (and I use the prefix sadly) should do community service, at least equivalent to what he has waisted in tax payers dollars, for abusing the system, by working for the "Chungs". As well as lose his postition.

Posted by: msnelson | September 19, 2007 4:41 PM

How about if all of the dry cleaners in the District/Region banded together to refuse to ever take any of Pearson's business again? Why should any business subject itself to this moron?

Btw, what ever happened to his status review for the position of Administrative Law Judge. I know there was a delay until a full panel could be in place, but hasn't that happened by now?

Posted by: Rocco | September 19, 2007 4:42 PM

"this judge needs to be placed on the space shuttle and left to orbit indefinitely"


That's a waste of a perfectly good space shuttle.

Outer space would've been great, but since it probably won't happen, this narcissitc sociopath just needs to go away very, very far away where this joker can live his pathetic little life perpetuating the fraud to himself and himself alone that he is a very important person, a legend...a legend but only in his own mind.

Unbelievable story but unfortunately true.

Posted by: rqf | September 19, 2007 4:42 PM

Another excuse -- are you showing off that world famous IQ again?

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:43 PM

"Happy" Cleaners? Do they have to guarantee that everyone leaves there happy? You just know that the perennially UN-happy Pearson could milk that one, too.

Posted by: just wondering... | September 19, 2007 4:43 PM

dft sounds like a racist to me . . . there was no "ordeal" that the Judge had to put up with, he created not must a mountain, but an entire solar system out of a molehill. For you do defend it as a way for minorities to get back at those nasty dry cleaners speaks volumes about your racist attitude.

Posted by: colorado kool aid | September 19, 2007 4:45 PM

I'm glad someone had the gumption to take a stand toward people of the Asian persuasion that come into a majority Black community and think that they can just treat their Black customers with such disregard and disrespect.

Posted by: Pam | September 19, 2007 4:46 PM

Kerry, the dry cleaners offered Pearson about $12,000 to go away and he refused their settlement offer. So how were they being arrogant? As for dft, here's an amazing idea for the next time you get service that you deem substandard. How about you never patronize that business again? But if you think that filling a multi-million dollar lawsuit over a $100 pair of pants is fair then you're seriously deluded. Or do you hate Asians that much? For a $100 he put a hard working family out of business so explain to me where the fairness is in that?

Posted by: a4 | September 19, 2007 4:47 PM

colorado - I don't understand your posting. What are you trying to say?

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:48 PM

To the User(s) who said don't blame the trial lawyers for this one. It is still the LOBBY for trial lawyers fault and that lobby is acting in the interest of trial lawyers nationwide. This lobby, through the democratic party, has prevented all meaningful tort reform. As politicians have their hands in the deep pockets/ cookie jars of the trial lawyers, we will never see any change.

Posted by: Jon | September 19, 2007 4:48 PM

Class Warfare! And the person with the most money won again! Disgusting!

Posted by: AbbieX | September 19, 2007 4:48 PM

A4, Colorado, and Another Excuse - read more closely folks. You all are way too personally invested in this for some reason. My comments were based on the facts. I'm not sure why you three are launching some personal attack (afterall, you just accused Pearson of doing that)

Just say what you want to say without the attacks.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 4:52 PM

Pam,

Get over yourself. If a customer (black, white, green, purple...WHO CARES!) gets poor service, he or she can take their business somewhere else. If a business is in a neighborhood that is majority Black, Pomeranian, White Cow with Pink Spots, or WHO CARES, treats customers with contempt, they, as a business, will not last long in that neighborhood.

People like you--who as a people have been subjected to horrible racism--will now turn around become racists themselve are just as sick and disgusting as the ones who were racist towards them.

Posted by: rqf | September 19, 2007 4:53 PM

Hah, I'm glad they're worse off now. They need to just go back to where they came from. We should commend great Americans like Pearson for fighting this lesser form of terrorism that immigrants are inflicting upon our country. Their business does not belong here.

Posted by: Jackie | September 19, 2007 4:54 PM

As has been said, I am amazed at the D.C. Court system letting this (whatever) come into the court with this (as_______nine) complaint. It just goes to show that evene they are patients (mental).

Posted by: Martha Bishop | September 19, 2007 4:54 PM

I disagree with Jackie, insofar as her praise was insufficient. He is not a mere "great American", he is a saint, a worker of miracles, and will clearly be apotheosized soon, there to join the ranks of the immortals, who spend their days tormenting the innocent and laughing gleefully at their insider status.

Posted by: Bill | September 19, 2007 4:59 PM

I love the way that all the Liars oops I mean Lawyers are coming together here in this forum. The story is not so much about the legal system of the US as it is for an argument that the suit should have been kicked out from the get go. Who gives a Shiite (pun intended) what political agenda this guy has...

If you as a Liar can look at yourself in the mirror and honestly say that the suit was just then YOU are the problem.

I for one plan on bringing ALL my dry cleaning to the Chung's shop downtown. Sure, I could keep it close to home but, hey, I work in the city anyway...

I encourage all readers who are enraged by this action to do the same.

And just in case you weren't paying attention, this is not a case of race. it is a case of one man taking advantage of the fabric of our society. Literally.

Posted by: jack mihogoph | September 19, 2007 5:00 PM

Well, with the fashion being to wear pants down below the butt cheeks, I guess there is less need for fine dry cleaning. Maybe they can put another check cashing place in its place.

Posted by: Ron | September 19, 2007 5:00 PM

Good, maybe they can go back to China, Korea, Hell, or whereever they came from.

Posted by: Jimmy | September 19, 2007 5:02 PM

98% of the lawyers make the rest look like scum-sucking t-rd balls.Roy Pearson is not abnormal, he's typical.

Posted by: Fun Bobby | September 19, 2007 5:08 PM

Time wounds all heels, and Pearson will get what's coming to him. I hope we are all around to see it when it happens.

Posted by: Jack Logan | September 19, 2007 5:11 PM

I have been the victim of several harrassing lawsuits, by a rich neighbor who happens to be a lawyer and wants to own my house and land. Fortunately all of the suits have been dismissed, and I was actually able to recover legal costs in one instance.
It is not all that hard to represent yourself in these situations. The judge has to put up with you as long as you mind your manners. Most of the time he or she has made up their minds after reviewing the pleadings anyway. It is somewhat entertaining when you begin to learn the ropes.In common-sense civil litigation, most people can be their own lawyer. It is really the only way to deal with malicious lawsuit and come out ahead.
I love the comment by a lawyer earlier on this thread who basically blamed "people" who "make them do it". Imagine a doctor on trial for malpractice using the same defense........

Posted by: Windhill | September 19, 2007 5:12 PM

Pearson must be mentally ill. I hope he never practices law again. He has ruined the livelihood and lives of two of our neighbors.

Posted by: Skip Moskey | September 19, 2007 5:12 PM

They did try to settle out of court by offering him a ridiculous amount of money and even tried to give him HIS pants back. Those pants were hanging in the office of the Chungs' attorney. The judge refused to take the settlement because it was not the $54 million he was outrageously seeking.

you wrote:
I am not sure why the dry cleaners did not try and settle this with Pearson before it spiraled downwards before the lawyers involved. Why the arrogance on the part of the shop owners when the age-old adage is "the customer is always right".


Posted by: Kerry | September 19, 2007 04:11 PM

Posted by: J | September 19, 2007 5:14 PM

I thought A4, Colorado, and Another Excuse would offer some intelligent comments about the matter; but it doesn't look as if any are forthcoming.

Until next time, everyone be safe and be nice.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 5:18 PM

Roy Pearson is not abnormal, he is typical. 98% of lawers give the rest a reputation similiar to scum-sucking t-rd balls.

Posted by: BobBoyer | September 19, 2007 5:18 PM

The paper could have done a better job on this. How about interviewing other disgruntled customers of the cleaners? The fact that the community quit going there indicates that there might have actually been some kind of a problem. If this happened in my community, it's likely locals would have rallied around the business if it had a good reputation.

And yes, Pearson is an idiot. He could have settled for his loss and more and walked away with his head held high. Instead he lost everything.

Posted by: Buck Batard | September 19, 2007 5:21 PM

I can't possibly be the only one who read this article, decided that Roy Pearson was a complete A$$, all without knowing that he was also black. I don't doubt that many of the posters on this forum have experienced racism from Asian immigrants but I don't think that's the case with Pearson. His suit makes no mention of discrimination and he doesn't seem like the kind to shy from making accusations.
I've noted that some people have charaterized Pearson and his suit as 'successful' because the dry cleaners have been shut down. The goal of the suit was money, not the shutdown of the cleaner. They've lost half of their business. He's lost his job and the suit. And yes, its hard to imagine this wasn't a factor, he's still going to go through a nasty divorce.

Posted by: Sprat | September 19, 2007 5:24 PM

Being a lawyer is more about a huge paycheck (or the allure of one) than it is about serving the justice system. I personally know, and detest, a deaf resident of Bethesda from a very wealthy family (who are also deaf, and several are also lawyers) who once threatened to sue a Metro train operator after a night out on the town drinking because they were closing the station - at closing time. This poor gentleman who is just doing his job - and happened to be black - turned white when he realized she could be serious.

Posted by: F. Lee Dershowitz, Jr. | September 19, 2007 5:24 PM

Jackie and Jimmy sitting on a tree, k-i-s-s-i...wait a minute. I probably shouldn't be joining them in their juvenile "if-their-skin-is-not-lily-white," "send them back to where ever they came from" playground antics.

God just GAVE them America. Shall we send the native Americans back to where they came from, too? Oh, wait up--they were here first!

What a couple of dunces.

Posted by: rqf | September 19, 2007 5:27 PM

Great to hear.

Posted by: Friday Knight | September 19, 2007 5:30 PM

@rqf

We rightfully took this country from the Native Americans, and it now belongs to us. Luckily for them, we still allow them to live here. Immigrants don't aim to take this country away from us, they just want to leech off of it consequently sucking the life out of it like they did their own countries. We built this country to be how it is, they built theirs to be how they are, so they come here to reap our rewards.

Posted by: Jackie | September 19, 2007 5:34 PM


DFT:
You argue that you are stating facts, and those that disagree with you are being emotional.
"think however, that anyone working, worshiping, living, and or socializing in predominantly minority neighborhoods is well aware of tensions especially with Asian shop keepers.(LA riots should have made this clear to everyone)

In addition to wild price deferentials between cleaning women's clothes and male clothes, Pearson's poor experience with the cleaners is probably unfortunately the norm."


You claim these are facts but in my opinion, are only your opinions.In my personal experience and (I am sure) "many others too" have been disappointed and in some way harmed by poor customer service. It galls me that you suggest destroying a small business owner is the only solution. And what is the result of this righteous action? One less dry-cleaner for the community to use.

Posted by: not dft | September 19, 2007 5:34 PM

The legal system in this country is just another bug business run by profiteering leaches. Prosecuting attorneys as well as dense and all their ilk. If the average person gets sued by or is accused of a crime most people cannot afford to fight these cases on their own whatever they maybe. It all comes back to the "Golden Rule" those who have the gold make the rules and profit by them. I hope that the Chungs can get the justice against this cretin but I doubt that will ever happen considering the cost to do that and thats why this idiot got away with it.

Posted by: HMMM..... | September 19, 2007 5:34 PM

Can someone post his address and phone number? I'm sure there are plenty of people who would like to give him a piece of their mind :-)

Posted by: SR | September 19, 2007 5:35 PM

It should be remembered that those who wrote the laws that govern America were first law-breakers.

Also, isn't it an odd coincidence that the killer at Virginia Tech was from a family of dry-cleaners?

We all reap what we sow, but it is our children that harvest the debt and pay for our sins.

Posted by: Steve Consilvio | September 19, 2007 5:36 PM

Kudos to the Chungs for taking the high road and being better than, well, Mr. You-Know-Who.
I wish them all the best and great success back at their original location and first store.

Also, good by you Mr. Manning for taking care of the loose ends pro bono.

Finally, great work to everyone who contributed to help the Chungs with their legal expenses.

Posted by: L. Wilson | September 19, 2007 5:41 PM

What a travesty and a shame.

Posted by: major Combat | September 19, 2007 5:44 PM

Been following this saga for months now... what a pathetic human being... hope he rots in a place that is most deserving of his lot.

Posted by: PAPA form SC | September 19, 2007 5:46 PM

For the first few weeks of this issue, I didn't know Pearson was black. I remember being VERY surprised when I learned that. I thought this was an insane abuse of the system, an "I'm doing this just 'cause I can" type of thing, regardless of the color of his skin.

Posted by: ERIC | September 19, 2007 5:49 PM

I disagree with you on two fronts...first, are you aware America is a land of Immigrants? Remember those people who landed in Massachusetts on the proverbial Plymouth Rock? They were immigrants. Even those saps who came and settled the raw forest down south somewhere...errrr, I mean Jamestown. They "migrated" "in" from somewhere else..."immigrants."

Next, what do you mean "we rightfully took this country away from the Native American and now it belongs to us"? Where do you live? Can I rightfully come and take your house and car and 1/3-acre and now it belongs to me?

And another thing, "stereotyping"--do you know what that is? EVERY immigrant leeches and sucks the life out of America?*

*See paragraph 1. Those horrible immigrants include Mama Lucia, who makes the pizza up the street from your white picketed fence house--her granny and pappy "immigrated" from Italy 150 years ago. And those stinkin' immigrants you honor by wearing green on March 17th and eating their delicious corned beef and cabbage...they "immigrated" over here during that thing they called "the Potato Famine."

But I digress...

Posted by: rqf | September 19, 2007 5:49 PM

Above post from me is in response to Jackie. Sorry.

Posted by: rqf | September 19, 2007 5:51 PM


I hope the Chungs find a lawyer who will work for percentage, to take pearson to court. Im no lawyer, but since Pearson put up all those flyers, and he was proven wrong - isnt that enough to sue for libel, or something else?

Whoever gave Pearson his job should fire him immediately.

Posted by: This whole thing is pathetic | September 19, 2007 5:55 PM

DFT,

I wasn't comparing the crimes, I was comparing the similarity in the outcomes. Obviously there is a big difference between OJ and Pearsons crimes...duh.

But the irony in the OUTCOMES are important to note, in my opinion. Most of America doesn't complain about the problems of the judicial system when they work AGAINST an African American (364 days a year). But when those same injustices occur IN FAVOR of an African American (that 1 day of the year) - there is outrage.

Hence, Pearson and OJ are...wait for it...

Icons of Irony

Posted by: Icons of Irony | September 19, 2007 5:55 PM

U.S. tort law is the craziest crock of superglued, Rube Goldberg hooey to be perpetrated on the lower and "middle" classes (hah), none of whom can afford to be in its sights, ever.

Posted by: rick | September 19, 2007 6:11 PM

Thus, the petty, opportunistic jerk wins! This is quite a trophy victory for him. He can put it on his mantelpiece, along with his pink slip once he loses his job. As a lawyer, I am appalled...

Posted by: cd | September 19, 2007 6:12 PM

I think the most outrageous aspect of this story is that Person is a judge. For a judge to put so much effort, time and money to take the owners of a mom & pop store to court for an allegedly lost pair of pants, shows such extreme poor judgement and disregard as to what should or shouldn't be deemed a relevant case. I hope there comes a day when Pearson's unreasonable and excessive arrogance sees some form of justice.

Posted by: Alex T | September 19, 2007 6:14 PM

"Also, isn't it an odd coincidence that the killer at Virginia Tech was from a family of dry-cleaners? We all reap what we sow, but it is our children that harvest the debt and pay for our sins.
Posted by: Steve Consilvio" (see above)

--Steve Consilvio, that is the quite possibly the dumbest comment I've ever heard. So this family deserved this because another different dry-cleaning family had a son with a mental illness???? Maybe your parents are reaping what they sowed because their son is obviously an idiot!!

Posted by: cd | September 19, 2007 6:19 PM

Why don't we unleash Roy Pearson on Osama Bin Laden?

Posted by: DFC | September 19, 2007 6:19 PM

Icons of Irony:

Your analysis made me pause for a second, the justice system is far from balanced; However in Pearson's case, the outrage set in well before I saw his picture. Frankly, my initial thought was he was some fat, white liberal democrat. ok, I added the "LD" tag to antagonize the lawyers out there.

Posted by: evidently clueless | September 19, 2007 6:20 PM

@rqf

lol u got trolled nub

Posted by: Jackie | September 19, 2007 6:24 PM

not dft (i.e. A4) -

so what exactly is your point? The market will determine which businesses survive and thrive and which ones fail and go away. (because of POOR customer service, poor product, etc.) That's the fundamental reason why any of us are reacting to this.

Pearson's lawsuit was brilliant (obviously in my opinion) because it called attention to a poor market player. As someone above mentioned, certain businesses, let's say a poor dry cleaner, in certain neighborhoods would never survive; the market (or paying customers) would never put up with it; they wouldn't put up with it in my neighborhood. Once again for those reading closely, it's the outrageousness of the entire episode that made this work in Pearson's favor.

Once again, the dry cleaner didn't respond to Pearson until he threatened to sue. Now any person in their right mind knows that it is highly unlikely that anyone suing for $54 M over a pair of pants would in fact win and get $54 M. In other words kids (A4, Colorado, Another Excuse), this case would not have nearly garnered as much atttention (if ANY) from the Better Business Bureau, judge, etc., if the lawsuit was simply for the cost of the pants; say $50. Pearson may have very well been something out of luck.

This is a free country and like it or not, lawsuits and the threat of lawsuits are the cost of doing business for any owner. Unfortunately, this may include frivolous suits as well. It's up to a judge to determine if such a suit is frivolous. (which in fact was the "outcome" because Pearson lost) But by that time, he had already accomplished his goal of shedding light on poor customer service. His goal, Pearson's agenda, may have very well been to drive a bad business out of the neighborhood. You argue what you want, but don't have a right to be a bad business, in any neighborhood you want.

I would actually like to see a hundred billion dollar lawsuit against my cell phone company for dropping my call last week to Tupelo, Mississippi. I'm sure that will get their attention!

I agree with another writer who mentioned that the media should have gotten more perspectives on the business from other neighborhood residents to provide more context.(which I mentioned above is important) In my neighborhood, we've cracked down on a liquor store that's a magnet for all kinds of weird clientale and nuissance crimes. Do we want them gone? You bet and we've gone to the liquor control board for that purpose!

There's an old saying that the best dis-infectant is sunshine.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 6:26 PM

My advice to Pearson: Borrow a small airplane from well to do friends and fly around Nevada until we never hear from you again.

Posted by: ryan in houston | September 19, 2007 6:30 PM

Roy Pearson should be committed to a mental institution and his property should be seized and given to the Chungs as compensation for Pearson's Insane persecution.

Posted by: keith_in_seattle | September 19, 2007 6:34 PM

Why does race always have to bubble up in cases such as this? Can't it be left to the fact that it was a pure case of a greed; also, Pearson appears to be mentally disturbed. I mean would a reasonably centered person really expect to be awarded millions of dollars for a lost pants?

Lastly, for all our sake, people will ignore the prevailing ignorance spouting from individuals like "Jackie"; hopefully, that gene pool stops with him/her - don't need dilute it with that kind of trash!

Posted by: justice4all | September 19, 2007 6:44 PM

dft,

I understand you are taking the counter-argument, and as such, I admire you for your efforts. What I cannot understand is how you feel this sheds the light on anything but a greedy little man who has too much power. He accomplished zip for his neighborhood, as you say, if it was a bad business, why on earth would they still be there? Furthermore, lets see if another business takes their place, or do the residents lose a little more convenience because of this "defender of the people"
Sue your Cell company then, lets see how far you get. Maybe you can blame it on some "group bias" or perhaps your rates are higher than your neighbor's.

Posted by: not dft | September 19, 2007 6:47 PM

我是一个中国学生,很喜欢看这些新闻和这个网站,现在我正在考取研究生而努力,老师和同学们都推荐我看这些西方的著名报纸和杂志,他们说我们中国的每年的考研试题上的文章都是从这这些著名杂志上选取的,我不得不看它们,虽然自己看不懂,但是为了研究生考试,其他的困难似乎都不重要了,希望自己能通过这里提高自己的英语水平,也希望世界上每个国家的人民来中国游玩,我们热烈期待着你们的到来!

Posted by: 胡尊江 | September 19, 2007 6:52 PM

My condolences to the Chung family. It's a shame that yet another oversized ego has ruined the lives of a nice family. The idea that Pearson is qualified to work as a judge is as silly as thinking a crackhead could be mayor. Oh! Wait a minute ... it's DC, isn't it? Anyway, I truly feel sorry for the Chung family as well as other poor b*stards that will have to appear before Pearson in the future. With any luck, he'll lose all his pants.

Posted by: Disillusioned Gringo | September 19, 2007 6:52 PM

Better look closely at Chung's financial records. This has the smell of a business on the skids trying to find a quick bail-out, sort of like burning down the store and collecting the insurance money. If the company was not doing well to begin with (and it's likely, considering the complaints about the establishment) it could easily be a case of Chung trying to blame his failing business on Pearson. That would make Chung no better than Pearson, and they would deserve each other.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 19, 2007 7:00 PM


Good for the Judge! We patriots out in America are ready for him to turn his attention and power on the Jews, Latinos, Women's groups, and Indians that are runing the good ole US of A. I'm proud of this colored boy for getting tough on the ones who bombed us in the big WWII.

Posted by: Floyd Turbo | September 19, 2007 7:08 PM

Pearson's vicious mean-spirited actions make his in-court rulings suspect....

I savor two responses:

a. A nation wide "Beware of Monster" campaign with posters and bumper stickers displaying Pearson's ugly mug.

b. A class-action lawsuit suing Pearson for the emotional stress put on us who are challenged to remain lawful in response to his behavior.

I welcome Pearson's lawsuit for my thoughts - I'm ready.


Posted by: frank | September 19, 2007 7:13 PM

Down here in Australia, our legal system may not be perfect either, but along with the rest of the world, we laugh at the stupidity of the American "System".

Posted by: Blunty | September 19, 2007 7:19 PM

We will see he goes to Hell slowly.

Posted by: peter | September 19, 2007 7:26 PM

I win. ;)

Posted by: Roy Pearson | September 19, 2007 7:33 PM

This is one of the main reasons we will not be moving back to the States. We live in Latin America with our 2 young children. We left lucrative careers in Washington DC because we do not want to raise our children to believe that you sue your way out of your problems. I love my country dearly but this guy Roy epitomizes exactly why we had to leave.

Posted by: allison | September 19, 2007 7:44 PM

hopefully they will sue this pearson when this is over...

Posted by: joseph | September 19, 2007 7:56 PM

I admire Roy, he stood his ground for the $10 he deserved.

Posted by: Andy E | September 19, 2007 7:59 PM

There are not bad laws or bad Judicial Systems, but bad Judges. I am 100% with the Judge of this case. If there would not be bad Judges, there would not be cases like this. A good Judicial System has a mechanism to qualify an autragiuos case just at the beginning.

Posted by: Eleazar Zavaleta | September 19, 2007 8:02 PM

not dft (i.e. A4) - why do you keep bringing racial bias in this? Now if you want to make an argument about power, then it becomes a class thing, right? You've missed the whole point.No company wants bad publicity period in whatever form (lawsuit, YouTube, viral email, etc). There is a cost associated with bad publicity as the Chung's are currently experiencing. I don't think anyone is innocent in this particular case; not the Chungs; and not Pearson.

Your logic about "why would they (the Chungs) still be there if they were a bad business" is terribly FLAWED.

There are numerous bad businesses, I'm sure, in Pearson's neighborhood, in your neighborhood, and in mine. Some of them will continue to thrive due to apathy; others will subcumb to market forces; (competition) primarily; but get this, some bad businesses thrive because they are the only ones there (absence of competition or a true competitive player).

I'm sure the cleaners will be much more sensitive and responsive to its customers the next time they encounter a similar complaint. Now whether you like it or not, that's an outcome that even the cleaners can't ignore.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 8:04 PM

Jackie, you rightfully took this country my ass. What kind of bizarre logic is that? That's like saying, I rightfully took your car.

Posted by: Fred | September 19, 2007 8:13 PM

dft,

How does a community benefit from a void? another abandoned building? I admit I have the luxury of discrimination (based on my judgement of service) when dealing with many different businesses. What I suggest here is you and the not-so-honorable Roy Pearson have deemed the Chung's business unworthy of existence, and nothing in your posts indicates the slightest bit of evidence to that end.

And I resent your rebounding racial tenor on to me. You are the one who proposed it in your initial e-mail. I have not once mentioned race as a motivator for the poor service or the subsequent lawsuit.

Posted by: not dft | September 19, 2007 8:17 PM

Good article, very informative and precise. However, I am of the opinion that this Pearson's character is the lowest of the low. This country is based on free enterprise and everyone makes mistakes. The dry cleaners lost your pants? Surely you could afford a new pair and if need be they could have paid for the new pair. Pain and suffering over the pants? Who is that mentally wrought over a pair of trousers? If they were given to you by Jimi Hendrix from the Woodstock tour or if Donald Trump had ejaculated in them or some other sentimental value was attached to them I MIGHT see the point, but then you should haven't worn them anyway you degenerate douche bag. If I see Pearson's in Hell I'll be happy because at least I won't be tormented nearly as horrendously as he. Screw you Pearsons, and I hope you're sterilized so you can't send any of your pathetic seed into a sewer rat you gutterchud. I'll bet your dad was masturbating and your mom just happened to sit on the copy of Guns N' Ammo he was using as splooge fodder after he left the out house. That's the only way I can possibly conceive of for your thought process to be so F@#%ed.

Love and peace for everyone, including this chode,

Oreo

Posted by: Orion the Blacksmith | September 19, 2007 8:31 PM

not dft (i.e. A4) - I provided context and offered that there is no proof of Pearson's claims being race based. There is a difference and I would suggest that you read more closely.

As far as abandoned building, again, your logic is FLAWED. There is a market for retail space. How do you know that it will remain abandoned? Might another business take its place offering another product and convenience. People will simply find another cleaner to take their business to. I doubt seriously that someone is ready to bulldoze the place that the Chung's left. It's not like they are not replaceable retail wise. Market demand will determine which business is suitable for the location they left.

I haven't deemed the Chung's business to be anything other than the victim of an angry customer who experienced poor customer service. You are drawing way too many bad conclusions from my comments.

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 8:37 PM

DC traffic is heavy because a ton of people are moving to Virginia and Maryland, not DC. Duh

Posted by: DC Traffic | September 19, 2007 8:41 PM

Jackie, you are one sick paranoid Nazi wannabe. Who died and left you the keys to Auschwitz? Most of us are too busy making a living and trying to get along with each other to separate US and THEM. Maybe you have a D.A.R. pedigree, but you're just a person with a vote, like the rest of us. The vast majority "Them" are here legally, work hard, pay taxes and some are even in the military. I bet you'd love to see the return of separate bathrooms, restaurants and schools for "You" and "Them". I'm an offay honky and it doesn't make me any better or worse than anyone. We're all in this together.

I'm sure Floyd Turbo's comment was tongue-in-cheek satire, because even a 4th grader knows the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The Chungs are of Chinese ancestry.

Posted by: Steve the Tuna | September 19, 2007 8:42 PM

It could very well be a mistake was made and the pants were misplaced, or whatever. But the Chungs didn't deserve what they got (we don't know the circumstances of how they treated Pearson - but my bet is, he was the obnoxious one). This judge is a head case; he doesn't belong on the bench or practicing law for that matter. He wasted A LOT of money over something so stupid it's incredible. The point of failure is our legal system. They should have stopped this suit before it began.

I wish the Chungs well and feel for the stress they've had to suffer over this insanity. I hope things work out for them.

Posted by: TC | September 19, 2007 8:44 PM

I bet that there must be dozens of people like me who have been taking clothes to the dry cleaners for years and absolutely never ever had a problem.

I drop my stuff off in the morning to one of several cleaners in the area--all Asian since that seems to mean something to some of the posters here. Each time I'm greeted with a smile and hello, I get a ticket with a tracking number, and my clothes are ready when I ask for them. It's cheap and easy, no matter where I go.

I just wanted to speak up for all the people reading this blog who are thinking, "Huh, I didn't realize dry cleaning was such a big deal."

Posted by: Good Dry Cleaning Experiences | September 19, 2007 8:48 PM

To Floyd Turbo,
So sad to read such ignorant comments. Not only are the Chungs not Japanese but Korean (so, they did "not bomb us") but the hatred you display is beyond belief. I truly hope you are not representative of this great country.

Posted by: John Smith | September 19, 2007 8:49 PM

dft,

This is my first time posting comments on any article (maybe it shows), and I really appreciate the discourse. I will have to say "we agree to disagree" with that, I leave you with this soon to be legendary quote:
" Don't tase me bro' "

Thanks again for getting me off the sidelines!

Posted by: not dft | September 19, 2007 8:49 PM

not dft - OK..I won't tase you man (LOL)..best of luck

Posted by: dft | September 19, 2007 8:53 PM

I belonged to a club in New York City that had to close because a "retired judge" claimed to have slipped and fallen on the sidewalk outside our building. We could not pay the legal fees and indemnity.

Could it be that judges have a grudge when they see so many others rip off millions that when they can they go for their share?

Dirty law suits could be the most damaging and economically damaging factor in our economy.

We´d better figure out how to stop them before our nation goes broke

Posted by: Hank Curtis | September 19, 2007 8:58 PM

The moron who sued them will suffer eternal damnation in hell.

Posted by: bob North Smithfield | September 19, 2007 9:12 PM

And, so Jackie...you're still around--after your nutjob comments on here that come out the mouths of:

(1) Flaming Hypocrites, at best

(2) Egotistical and Arrogant jack"donkeys" (like their stuff don't stink)

(3) Racist Ignorant Sacks of Protein

I think I like 3 best.

Posted by: rqf | September 19, 2007 9:18 PM

"When Pearson first started gathering material for his aggressive legal battle, he posted fliers on light poles all around the Fort Lincoln neighborhood, asking residents if they had been ripped off by Custom and announcing his own displeasure with the service there. Business declined significantly after that and never rebounded."

This is why all Asians should get smart and leave the black neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods are not worthy of service. The blacks won't start businesses there so the Asians filled the void. Now if the Asians leave, the black community will have to turn far away to have their needs fulfilled.

Blacks have been re-segregating themselves for the past 30 years. If this is what you want, please, be my guest. After all this time I now think that black integration is a complete and utter failure. Any black that wants to better him or herself is derided as "being white." What is wrong with education? Blame it on the honkies and black self respect will rise. Respect, you don't have any idea what the word means. It isn't something you deserve, it is something that is earned.

Go ahead, I have big shoulders and if you want to blame me for your stupidity, I can laugh it off. We have tried to accommodate and have you have failed to accept.

You go your own way, and we will go ours.

Posted by: Intergration-A Failed System? | September 19, 2007 9:36 PM

A gross mis-use of the American legal system by a person who should know better. This judge (hope ex-judge) should be forced to compensate these poor people fully AND go to jail. Disgusting

Posted by: Failure to communicate | September 20, 2007 12:21 AM

"I drop my stuff off in the morning to one of several cleaners in the area--all Asian since that seems to mean something to some of the posters here. Each time I'm greeted with a smile and hello, I get a ticket with a tracking number, and my clothes are ready when I ask for them. It's cheap and easy, no matter where I go."

Me too. I live in NorCal and there's a cleaner across the street. Nice people; they do great work. My BF is terribly detail-oriented and when I asked them to get a speck off his shirt, they had to squint to see it, but they got it off anyway. When I lived in DC, the same was true of the dry cleaners I frequented there.

Some business is bad, some business is good. If I find myself repeatedly being treated badly at one establishment, I go elsewhere. Most places are average: they smile, say thank you, did you find everything okay. Some go above and beyond, and some are surly and only grunt when you request their services. But I have never experienced anything that would fuel me to the courtroom asking for $65m. Not even ridiculous bank fees, meat in my vegetarian burrito, or dozens of broken glasses from my shipping them cross-country via USPS (my own stupidity for not using a more reputable courier).

I've never lost an article of clothing at the cleaner's, though, so maybe that's worse.

Posted by: Mona | September 20, 2007 12:30 AM

"Lawyers are not the problem, folks. the lawyers don't create the nutjob plaintiffs. People in general are the problem."

Gee, all those 'We can get you money!' ads on TV are money wasted then?

"There a reasonable and unreasonable people in every profession."

True, the 1% of ethical lawyers are tarred by the other 99%.

Posted by: rj | September 20, 2007 12:39 AM

it is an absolute travesty to see the actions of one egotistic twisted-up man ruin the american dream for a hardworking family - all over a frivolous lawsuit. it just proved to the world that he is nothing but a greedy, pitiful and idiotic fool who merely pulled this bs of a lawsuit to get his 15 minutes of fame, while trying to extort money from a hardworking family and their small business. he so mistakingly thought was the right thing to do. bravo, pearson...you got your wish, didn't you? i can almost imagine you gloating over this news...and to think, YOU caused it! someone - as a practicing member of the law field - who should have the integrity, the ethics and a damn conscience to see what your greed/arrogance/stupidity/crass did.

they are legally here, i might add, to people who have been bashing the chung family for being illegal and gloating over their misfortunes - exactly where do you get your facts??? or do you just make a sweeping generalization that non-whites are illegal? if so - go back to school!!! get your facts straight!!!

and to see all the racist comments on here, especially towards asians - absolutely disgusts me. people who take one personal interaction with another that results in an outcome that they don't agree with...and to make a blanket assumption/belief is simply cementing a stereotype and fuels racism. it's sad to see that racism is still alive...in the 21st century. and it's all the more "amazing" to see these supposed allegations of discrimination/racism pop out in people's comments here - keep your racist self in the closet.

but...it's as simple as this - you get mistreated/get poor customer service - go elsewhere. why bother frequenting a place where your business is not appreciated? but before you make your claim that the business has mistreated you - think this first: have YOU treated them the way you want to be treated?? have YOU made a request that you wouldn't be bothered by fulfilling?? it seems like most people who claim that they are mistreated are the very ones that perpetrate it - because THEY have been the ones that acted/behaved/treated another with utter disrespect, arrogance and simply because you think the adage "the customer is always right" is really true. IT'S NOT!!!

i hope that pearson gets what he so rightfully deserves...and may there be justice served for the consequences his actions caused. he ruined a hardworking family's dreams of an american life by dragging them through the mud for a frivolous lawsuit, for supposed millions for ONE stupid pair of pants. THEY went through REAL pain and suffering...not him! they rightfully deserve compensation for having to deal with such a nutjob.

Posted by: md24 | September 20, 2007 1:32 AM

Last year, Manassas was forced to repeal an anti-immigrant ordinance that restricted the manner in which families could live together after the ACLU of Virginia threatened to sue.
"This is an important case not just for the immigrant community in Hazelton, but for the message it sends to local governments across the nation, including those in Virginia," said ACLU of Virginia Executive Director Kent Willis. "These local ordinances promote distrust of all foreigners, including those here legally, and fuel xenophobia and discrimination, especially against Latinos." - I think against most Asians like the Chung and Norman Hsu ... Hey this world is insane

Comment by White.foreigner.illegal.not against to - September 20, 2007

Posted by: white.foreigner | September 20, 2007 3:19 AM

They will have a better class of clientele at the new location. You can take Pearson out of the 'hood, but you can't take the 'hood out of Pearson.

Posted by: Ron | September 20, 2007 3:35 AM

Shy of joining the current flow of pos/neg banter, I feel that maybe, possibly, just one point of contention has yet to be addressed. Has it entered our collective here, to ask that maybe a re-investigation of his previous judicious rulings are even near legal, let alone, SANE ?? I rest assured,his "lack-of" really f*%&#d some poor "norms" like us.But, in a nicer note, my ex-fiddle player (bluegrass){deceased}was a D.C. Judge,and we never care about race,is that a problem ???

Posted by: dropmedic | September 20, 2007 3:41 AM

To "Nat"..

Your barking up the wrong tree..

First of all, eventhough he may have been appointed to the bench, I don't see Mr. Pearson having the mental capacity nor the foresight to have filed this frivolous
lawsuit on behalf of entire African-American community. He was just being vindictive and callus..As many have said already, he is a very small man..

And for the sake of arguement, even if he was carrying the torch for the entire African-American community, I don't see how the Chungs should be responsible for 200 years of African-Americans being treated "unfairly" in this country.

If you, Mr. Pearson or anyone else for that matter feel as though you have been mis-treated at an establishment run by Asians, Latinos, or what have you..then take your business elsewhere to a place that will value your patronage.

Good luck to the Chungs..and to Mr. Pearson as well, hopefully he will use his knowledge of the law in a more constructive manner in the future..

Posted by: passingby | September 20, 2007 7:06 AM

There is the main factor in this case that all of you have overlooked. Barred from testimony was the fact that this all started when Pearson came on sexually to Soo Chung. When she rejected his advances, he became enraged and plotted his revenge. The "missing pants" ploy was his best option. If Soo had only taken Pearson into the back and serviced him, this would never have happened. I hope that she has learned her lesson.

Posted by: emptyhandkiller | September 20, 2007 9:59 AM

I wished I lived closer (Arkansas) so I could support the Chungs directly... Maybe I should mail some dry cleaning to them, including money for return postage... Now that's an idea...

Posted by: Chung Family Fan | September 20, 2007 10:05 AM

Someone needs to introduce Pearson to the old Sloppy Carl.

If he still has a job in the judicial system next year it'll be a travesty.. he clearly doesn't possess enough judgment to determine frivolity.

Posted by: D. Sanchez | September 20, 2007 11:46 AM

Whoo Hooo! I'm so glad Roy Pearson beat the crap out of those Koreans! I hope now all the other damn Korean business owners will learn their lesson from all of this... Treat your customers right by correcting your mistakes and getting rid of the surly attitude! I wish more Roy Pearsons were out there to cull the Korean business owners down to the good upstanding ones... One down, 6 million to go.

Posted by: Mike | September 20, 2007 12:28 PM

Hooray for Pearson!

As for the Chungs, "Ha, Ha!"

Posted by: Nelson | September 20, 2007 12:31 PM

Mother Friggin Korean business owners! They got exactly what they deserved.

Mr. Pearson, I admire your strength and tenacity. I wish there were more like you.

You have done us all a favor bigger then we can imagine. For that "Thank You"

Posted by: May | September 20, 2007 12:34 PM

I see the biggot squad is out in full force.

Posted by: Shocked and Awed | September 20, 2007 1:11 PM

Hi ERIC, For the first few weeks of this issue, I didn't know Pearson was Black either! I was also suprised when I found out his skin color, it made me proud he was Black.

It's rare to see a Black person stand up for what he feels is right and put so much of himself into this case. I think he did the right thing all the way around. This will hopefully teach the other Korean business owners out there to stop treating Blacks as inferior, because some of us have the capability to shut your business down if you don't act right.

Go Pearson!

Posted by: Mike | September 20, 2007 1:18 PM

To Shocked and Awed, get over yourself. We are not any more a bigot than anyone else on this chat is. We're just sharing our viewpoints, and rightfully so. Isn't this discussion here just for that purpose? No need to start name-calling. That's just immature.

Posted by: May | September 20, 2007 1:21 PM

F**k the Chungs!!!

Posted by: Ralph | September 20, 2007 1:23 PM

Start name calling, May? How about this one from you:

"Mother Friggin Korean business owners!"

Pot, meet the Kettle...

Posted by: Sympathizer... | September 20, 2007 1:25 PM

Hey Sympathizer...

"Mother Friggin" is not name calling. I'm not saying that they actually "Frigg" their mothers. I was simply putting and expression before my my sentence.

Shocked and Awed was calling us actual "biggots". There is quite a difference there... figure it out, put your tail between your legs and move on.

Posted by: May | September 20, 2007 1:42 PM

This is one reason I vote Republican. Trial lawyers and most attorneys vote Democrat because the Democrats will not allow tort reform.

Posted by: me | September 20, 2007 2:11 PM

DFT - A single person should (ab)use the legal system in a crusade against a business they dislike?

Free market means not going there anymore if you're mistreated. If the business drives away enough customers, it fails on its own. If 99% of people are OK with it, and 1% don't like it, it'll probably succeed. Good job redefining "free market" to meaning maybe 1% of customers control who stays and who goes...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 20, 2007 2:31 PM

Pearson sounds like an excellent candidate for George Bush's new Attorney General. He's fit right into that den of thieves.

Posted by: Wooly Bully | September 20, 2007 2:42 PM

May:

--------------------
"Mother Friggin" is not name calling. I'm not saying that they actually "Frigg" their mothers. I was simply putting and expression before my my sentence.

Shocked and Awed was calling us actual "biggots". There is quite a difference there... figure it out, put your tail between your legs and move on.
--------------------

Hey, if that logic helps you sleep at night, feel free :)

Posted by: Sympathizer... | September 20, 2007 2:58 PM

Hey, Sympathizer...

Of course I "felt free" with that logic... that's why I said it in the 1st place.

Dumbass.

Posted by: May | September 20, 2007 3:25 PM

So many of the posters here should be ashamed. Imagine this was a white customer going to a family run black cleaner. Do you guys have any idea how racist your coming off. Its quite sad.

Posted by: Jon | September 20, 2007 3:54 PM

If this was about a family run Black cleaner then the Black folks would be happy as hell to have cornered the market on dry cleaners! And the Koreans would be the drug dealers wearing their pants down to their knees. Ha! ...and I'm Black.

Posted by: May | September 20, 2007 4:10 PM

We built this country to be how it is, they built theirs to be how they are, so they come here to reap our rewards.
===============================

Unless you are an AMeircan Indian you , too ,are an immigrant.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 20, 2007 4:11 PM

If this discussion was about a white customer going into a Black owned dry cleaner, it wouldn't be racist.

The fact is:
1. ALL the dry cleaners would have to be Black owned.
2. The Blacks would have to be as rude and as difficult to work with as the Koreans are.
3. The Blacks would have to learn to speak Korean.

Posted by: Mike | September 20, 2007 4:15 PM

May:

---------------------------
Hey, Sympathizer...

Of course I "felt free" with that logic... that's why I said it in the 1st place.

Dumbass.
---------------------------

Still don't get it, do you? And there you go with the name calling agin... :)

Posted by: Sympathizer... | September 20, 2007 4:49 PM

Sorry, didnt realize that Pearson was offered $12,000 for the pants!!!!

Posted by: Kerry | September 20, 2007 4:52 PM

People posting about black owned cleaners are presupposing that blacks in the hood would work! Drug dealing and hanging out...this is the only type of "work" in the hood.

Posted by: It's All Crap | September 20, 2007 5:08 PM

MHR:

While I'm not a particular fan of most trial lawyers, this case was not brought by a trial lawyer. Pearson -- an administrative law judge -- did this all on his own. I seriously doubt that even the most unscrupulous trial lawyer (Google Melvyn Weiss for example) would have been stupid enough to handle this case, even on a potentially lucrative contingency.

What disturbs me is that the courts that heard the case did not immediately dismiss with prejudice as a frivolous abuse of the system, and declare him in contempt on his first appeal. As a abusing officer of the court, Pearson deserves sanction at least equivalent to North Carolina's Nifong.

Posted by: Marty | September 20, 2007 5:28 PM

I would be in favor of giving this judge a reward!!!!
Let's send him fishing with Scott Petterson!

Posted by: Tim | September 20, 2007 5:43 PM

Good thing there is no more racism in the USA, otherwise this comment section could get really ignorant and nasty.

Posted by: J.E.Carter | September 20, 2007 6:08 PM

dft

You sound like a student who has just started studying marketing and/or business administration. I think your logic is FLAWED. You have a lot of opinions that you state are facts and one does not have to look far to see that you are talking off the top of your head when it comes to understand how a market works in relation to communities.

You still have not said why the Chung's store was on its way out anyway so what Pearson has done is a good thing....

Contrary to what you think, Pearson's case did not achieve the goal you stated. That fact is highlighted in this and every other discussion I have read and heard about this case. Everyone is talking about the ridiculousness of the lawsuit not the need to improve customer service.

I suggest you stay in class and listen carefully until the end of the semester before you start using your knowledge to assess and analyze situations. Thanks.

Posted by: hmmm... | September 20, 2007 7:29 PM

Well, I see that vaherder has surfaced under three different aliases.

Posted by: Busted | September 20, 2007 8:23 PM

shame on all those who think pearson did the "right thing". yall are either idiotic to even think that he is a sane person in the first place, or yall are dumb as sh-t to think his f'd up thinking is correct. any person with the decency and common sense would know that pearson was out of his mind to even think that such a frivolous lawsuit is warranted. bullll!!! what a f-'n loser to pull this ridiculous s--t over one freakin pair of pants!!! i hope he gets what he deserves (karma will kick his ass sooner or later...let's hope sooner!!!!)

i'm not asian (but i do have a few asian friends, including koreans), but what the f--k is up with these racist anti-korean comments??? it's like the floodgates have opened to all the racist and bigoted people who don't even deserve the voice to spew their toxic s--t!!!!!!! it's absolutely uncalled for...and wholly disturbing to think that such closed-minded racist fools still are prevalent in society today (what a f-'n disgrace!!!!!)

to think that all koreans are like that...yall are either ridiculously racist or yall have an inferiority complex to even fathom that all koreans are like that!!! don't smear the whole ethnicity over a personal experience that obviously didn't go your way....and please, stop faking like yall are the victims!!! maybe if you took your head out of your a-- to see that people of all races, regardless of skin color, should be treated the same...maybe show some understanding by treating them with the same respect that you'd want in return! i see way too many people who treat people of other races in such a sh--ty way and then claim that they were mistreated?? how preposterous of them...and to all of yall who keep posting such garbage s--t on here!!!

the real victims in this case are the chungs. yall that don't think so are f-'g ridiculous to think otherwise. or maybe yall are f-d up in the head like pearson.

Posted by: disgusted | September 21, 2007 12:33 AM

The admin judge should be required to perform community service, such as standing on a nearby street corner, holding a large green arrow, and directing customers to the Chungs original dry cleaners shop. Pearson should be REQUIRED to pay ALL of the Chungs legal costs - no questions. Let him wear a large badge of shame and bow to the Chungs in humility.

Posted by: Bill of Rights / Don | September 21, 2007 3:34 AM

We need to take action against people like this. It is now time to take matters in our own hands. We can not trust our govt. That is why the govt is trying to outlaw guns. They want to rule us in the way th english ruled the scotts in the 11 century. we need a william wallace to lead us against this foe. Next, will Bush or his cronies exercise their right to father your first baby?

Posted by: AL in Florida | September 21, 2007 5:06 AM

Kudos to you, Disgusted. You took words right off my mouth. Your comments were spot on in every aspect. I can't believe there are people who think Pearson's lawsuit was justified. I don't understand them. It's like I don't understand why some people believe OJ is innocent, or Michael Jackson had a skin-pigment disease that turned his skin pale, or Britney Spears really rocked in her VMA performance. Get the idea?

Posted by: Disgusted_too | September 21, 2007 5:37 AM

Just so people know, we attorneys are not all the same and I for one, am disgusted with this Administrative Law Judge. He should be disbarred for this ridiculous, frivolous suit. In the 1950's, lawyers were the most respected profession in the country. Now we are lower than television evangelists and used car salesman. Our country deserves better. The legal profession better wake up and demand higher standards from its members. Americans deserve so much better.

Posted by: Disgusted Attorney | September 21, 2007 2:27 PM

Attorneys are supposed to be professionals. We are supposed to lead by example. We should try to first settle problems without lititgation. And we are supposed to put the clients' interests over our own personal financial gain. This is why I went to law school. This is why I became an attorney. I wanted to help people. These type of cases just kill me and make me feel so ashamed about my profession. I blame the judges too. They should be coming down hard on frivolous lawsuits and sanction attorneys who abuse the system. This poor couple was literally put out of business because of one nasty, rotten, egotistical, power hungry maniac. I wish them well in their present Dry Cleaning store and I encourage the residents of D.C. to bring their dry cleaning items to them for cleaning. As for the judge who did this to them, grow up and try to behave like a real human being.

Posted by: Still Disgusted Attorney | September 21, 2007 2:37 PM

Hey Kerry - Don't you remember they offered him over $10K for his designer pants, and he refused!

Posted by: Note to Kerry | September 21, 2007 5:20 PM

Regardless of the quality of service, the Chungs tried to settle the problem, I think, fairly. As I understand it, they'd offered to replace the entire suit.

Still, rather that be reasonable, Pearson sued. I can't say that I have much of a problem with that either, though I don't see the usefulness. Poor service should be redressed (no pun intended).

What upsets me is that he asked for $64M in damages and was allowed to do so by the court system; FOR A PAIR OF TROUSERS! I don't care who Pearson thinks he is, the loss of use of a suit is certainly NOT worth that. The court should have used some common sense and reduced his request to the cost of replacement.

Posted by: SP | September 22, 2007 1:59 PM

"across from the DC convention center" In other words what the WP is too PC to say is that Chung took his business back to China Town where they can operate a cleaners without being taken to the cleaners. This was a legalized form of looting similar to the Rodney King and similar riots that have destroyed downtown businesses across the country and scared anyone from replacing them. And the locals think the reason there aren't any jobs or services in their neighborhoods is just racism.

Posted by: KO | September 22, 2007 6:11 PM

It amazes me that in the 21st century we still have such ignorant, hateful, racist comments towards Asians being posted. To hide behind the anonymity of the internet while posting such despicable stuff is beyond cowardly. I pray to God none of you have children so that the cycle of hate will stop with your sorry genes.

Posted by: Eric | September 25, 2007 7:03 PM

I read about this a while ago and I think Pearson is a jerk who sued for a pair of pants. He put a hardworking family through hell and should be punished for it. By the way, I'm disgusted at other comments that made fun of the Chungs and cheering Pearson for suing them. I'd like to see them say it publicly and see what happens.

Posted by: AJ | September 26, 2007 12:45 AM

On August 2, 2007 it was revealed that a panel recommended not to give Pearson a ten year term as an Administrative Law Judge, after his initial two year term expired mid-2007, in part because his suit against Mr Chung demonstrated a lack of "judicial temperament." Pearson was appointed in 2005 and will lose his $100,512 salary if a hearing upholds that decision.

From Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_v._Chung

Posted by: Justin | September 26, 2007 2:43 PM

Why is this cretinous scumbag Pearson not facing civil suits, criminal sanctions, and jail time for his atrocities?

Posted by: tempus | October 26, 2007 2:00 AM

Posted by SP - "Regardless of the quality of service, the Chungs tried to settle the problem, I think, fairly. As I understand it, they'd offered to replace the entire suit."

Yes, and eventually offered him TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS just to leave them alone. He turned that down, demanding a sum of over sixty million. Protecting consumer rights is important of course but it should not give way to absurd levels of responsibility. If every time a dry cleaners loose a pair of pants they can be sued for sixty million dollars there wouldnt be any dry cleaners on planet earth!

Posted by: Gorz | October 28, 2007 11:13 AM

Cool topic! ;)

Posted by: Kilkoi | December 24, 2007 12:01 PM

Cool topic! ;)

Posted by: Kilkoi | December 25, 2007 3:10 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2010 The Washington Post Company