I just read this little tidbit of news on CNN news online. It seems the absurd lawsuit — $54 million over a missing pair of pants — just won’t go away:
“The District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied Roy Pearson’s “voluminous” petition to rehear his case, attorney Christopher Manning said in a written statement Tuesday. Manning represents the family who owns the dry cleaners Pearson sued.
In December, the court denied Pearson’s initial appeal. His final option is to ask the U.S. Supreme Court hear his case.
The saga began in May 2005, when Pearson took several pairs of pants to Chung’s Custom Cleaners for alteration as he prepared to start a new job. Pearson said one pair of pants was lost and the Chungs tried to give him another instead.”
I remember when this case was first filed in 2005, and I couldn’t believe that it even got past the first judge. Talk about frivolous lawsuits. Not that $54 million is frivolous, but over a pair of pants?
It is fitting that the DC Court of Appeals denied this latest appeal, and I hope Pearson does not take it to the Supreme Court. There are more important things for the Justices to consider than giving a man millions of dollars because his pants were lost. Or even because the owners of the dry cleaners tried to pass off a replacement pair and not tell him.
If I remember correctly, once the duplicity was proven, the owners offered to replace the lost pants and apologized, and that should have been sufficient.
In fact, I thought it was, way back then in 2005, and breathed a sigh of relief that the case was settled and gone. So I was shocked to see the news this morning, and I only have one thing to say,” Stop wasting the courts’ precious time, Mr. Pearson.”
2 thoughts on “The Epitome of Absurd”
I believe there is something in the water! Things just keep getting more and more ridiculous…as you can see on my blog. *lol*
I agree with you, I thought it was a crazy lawsuit in the first place. What have we come to in this society? Every time he brings a suit about this, he should have to pay the cleaner’s court costs.