He's at it again! Judge in pants lawsuit sues to get job back - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Ireneparalegal · 05-03-2008, 01:40 AM

Doesn't this guy ever learn?

From Paul Courson
CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The former judge who last year lost a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against a dry cleaners over a missing pair of pants wants his job back.

Roy Pearson sued the owners of this dry cleaning business for $54 million over a missing pair of pants.

Roy Pearson was not reappointed after his term expired as an administrative law judge in the District of Columbia.

He filed a lawsuit Thursday in federal court accusing city government and others of an "unlawful demotion and subsequent termination."

Pearson was taken off the bench in May 2007, during his unsuccessful $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaning business, which he accused of failing to meet its promise of "satisfaction guaranteed."

As an administrative law judge, Pearson would hear cases involving zoning law and certain business disputes.

A city panel that decides reappointments had notified Pearson during the controversial lost trousers trial that his status was under review.

A source on that panel said at the time that any judge must meet certain standards of conduct "on and off the bench."

The source, who was among the members of the panel at the time of Pearson's review, said "a judge is a judge 24/7; whether or not they use good judgment in all aspects of their lives is what we can consider."

The civil case, in which Pearson represented himself, sought punitive and compensatory damages against a small family-owned dry cleaners that once posted signs promising "satisfaction guaranteed."

A pair of trousers that hung by the witness stand was a featured part of the trial last summer. The owners testified that the pants belonged to Pearson, who denied under oath that they were his.

The judge found in favor of the dry cleaners and disagreed with Pearson that the satisfaction promise was unconditional. Pearson then lost an appeal filed at D.C. Superior Court, but consideration of his federal appeal has been delayed at his request.

In court documents made available Friday at U.S. District Court in Washington, Pearson, again acting as his own attorney, relies on what he considers Washington's "Whistleblower Protection" law to try to establish illegal retaliation.

The trial over the lost trousers generated a storm of criticism among fairness advocates, who accused Pearson of abusing the system. The latest litigation has begun to produce the same reaction.

"He lost his job because he proved he did not have the legal requirements to fill the job, namely a judicial temperament," said Darren McKinney of the American Tort Reform Association.

Pearson did not return a message left at home.

In his suit seeking to regain his job, he also seeks "compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial, in excess of $75,000 from all defendants jointly and severally," as well as an unspecified amount of punitive damages "to be determined at trial."

Efforts to seek reaction from the individuals named in the lawsuit were unsuccessful. No initial hearing date has been set in the civil case assigned to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan.

catlover79 · 05-03-2008, 01:51 AM

Oh, not this guy again!!!

Can't we all sue HIM for refusing to go away??

Ireneparalegal · 05-03-2008, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catlover79

Oh, not this guy again!!!

Can't we all sue HIM for refusing to go away??

You said it!!

Hollow · 05-04-2008, 12:05 AM

i never kept up with this story much. why did he lose his job?

Ireneparalegal · 05-04-2008, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by safety pin

i never kept up with this story much. why did he lose his job?

This is from the story:

"He lost his job because he proved he did not have the legal requirements to fill the job, namely a judicial temperament," said Darren McKinney of the American Tort Reform Association.

Zoneboy · 05-04-2008, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catlover79

Oh, not this guy again!!!

Can't we all sue HIM for refusing to go away??

Are you suggesting that we sue the pants off him?

Ireneparalegal · 05-04-2008, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

Are you suggesting that we sue the pants off him?

TOUCHE!!!!!

catlover79 · 05-04-2008, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

Are you suggesting that we sue the pants off him?

Ireneparalegal · 05-04-2008, 12:23 AM

He should change his name. Remember that Johnny Cash song, A BOY NAMED SUE.

sara · 05-04-2008, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

Are you suggesting that we sue the pants off him?

catlover79 · 05-04-2008, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ireneparalegal

He should change his name. Remember that Johnny Cash song, A BOY NAMED SUE.

This is the Boy Named SUED.

Ireneparalegal · 05-04-2008, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catlover79

This is the Boy Named SUED.

Damn straight.

OH Nuts! · 05-25-2008, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

Are you suggesting that we sue the pants off him?

me too! That is SO FUNNY Charles I almost WET MYSELF! lol

catlover79 · 05-25-2008, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rich p

me too! That is SO FUNNY Charles I almost WET MYSELF! lol

OH Nuts! · 05-25-2008, 12:14 AM

That judge better watch himself or HE'LL be the one taken to the cleaners. LOL
Let's sic Judge Judy on him!!!

05-03-2008, 01:40 AM	#1
Ireneparalegal LEGAL SPICE ;) Forum Legend Join Date: Jul 25, 2005 Location: OXNARD, CA - WHERE THE DALLAS COWBOYS TRAIN & PRACTICE Posts: 38,691	He's at it again! Judge in pants lawsuit sues to get job back Doesn't this guy ever learn? From Paul Courson CNN WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The former judge who last year lost a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against a dry cleaners over a missing pair of pants wants his job back. Roy Pearson sued the owners of this dry cleaning business for $54 million over a missing pair of pants. Roy Pearson was not reappointed after his term expired as an administrative law judge in the District of Columbia. He filed a lawsuit Thursday in federal court accusing city government and others of an "unlawful demotion and subsequent termination." Pearson was taken off the bench in May 2007, during his unsuccessful $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaning business, which he accused of failing to meet its promise of "satisfaction guaranteed." As an administrative law judge, Pearson would hear cases involving zoning law and certain business disputes. A city panel that decides reappointments had notified Pearson during the controversial lost trousers trial that his status was under review. A source on that panel said at the time that any judge must meet certain standards of conduct "on and off the bench." The source, who was among the members of the panel at the time of Pearson's review, said "a judge is a judge 24/7; whether or not they use good judgment in all aspects of their lives is what we can consider." The civil case, in which Pearson represented himself, sought punitive and compensatory damages against a small family-owned dry cleaners that once posted signs promising "satisfaction guaranteed." A pair of trousers that hung by the witness stand was a featured part of the trial last summer. The owners testified that the pants belonged to Pearson, who denied under oath that they were his. The judge found in favor of the dry cleaners and disagreed with Pearson that the satisfaction promise was unconditional. Pearson then lost an appeal filed at D.C. Superior Court, but consideration of his federal appeal has been delayed at his request. In court documents made available Friday at U.S. District Court in Washington, Pearson, again acting as his own attorney, relies on what he considers Washington's "Whistleblower Protection" law to try to establish illegal retaliation. The trial over the lost trousers generated a storm of criticism among fairness advocates, who accused Pearson of abusing the system. The latest litigation has begun to produce the same reaction. "He lost his job because he proved he did not have the legal requirements to fill the job, namely a judicial temperament," said Darren McKinney of the American Tort Reform Association. Pearson did not return a message left at home. In his suit seeking to regain his job, he also seeks "compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial, in excess of $75,000 from all defendants jointly and severally," as well as an unspecified amount of punitive damages "to be determined at trial." Efforts to seek reaction from the individuals named in the lawsuit were unsuccessful. No initial hearing date has been set in the civil case assigned to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan.
	__________________ DALLAS COWBOYS ARE HERE AT TRAINING CAMP!!!

05-03-2008, 01:51 AM	#2
catlover79 God Bless Val Forum Addict Join Date: May 29, 2006 Location: Bewitched in Ohio Posts: 70,392	Oh, not this guy again!!! Can't we all sue HIM for refusing to go away??
	__________________ "Jesus loves you and He approves this message." "I'm alive. I'm feeling good. I'm trying to live every moment as much as I can." - Valerie Harper, March 2013

05-04-2008, 12:05 AM	#4
Hollow Member Forum Superstar Join Date: Dec 16, 2001 Posts: 30,406	i never kept up with this story much. why did he lose his job?

05-04-2008, 12:23 AM	#9
Ireneparalegal LEGAL SPICE ;) Forum Legend Join Date: Jul 25, 2005 Location: OXNARD, CA - WHERE THE DALLAS COWBOYS TRAIN & PRACTICE Posts: 38,691	He should change his name. Remember that Johnny Cash song, A BOY NAMED SUE.

05-25-2008, 12:14 AM	#15
OH Nuts! Member Forum King Join Date: Feb 15, 2005 Posts: 133,383	That judge better watch himself or HE'LL be the one taken to the cleaners. LOL Let's sic Judge Judy on him!!!