NOTHING!!!

That's what a D.C. Superior Court judge ruled against Roy Pearson in his $54 million dollar suit against the Chung family. The Washington Post has a great article that includes a link to the court opinion. Apparently, Pearson called forth several witnesses to testify and one of them described the Chungs as "Nazis." Pretty strong words to use against your local laundry, and definitely not a comedic description like, for example, "The Soup Nazi" in Seinfeld. Judge Judith Bartnoff adeptly rebuked each of the witnesses and their testimonies, but I check it out in full because they can be read as narratives to be deconstructed. Aside from the dramatic use and intent of the witness, I want to know what would compel someone to describe the Chungs as "Nazis."

It's such a bizarre case when I first heard about it months ago, but unfortunately, there's the distinct possibility that Pearson will file an appeal. The Chung family will have a donation drive to support their legal expenses because their savings have been depleted as a result of this idiot.

Plaintiff Gets Nothing in $54M Case of Missing Pants
by Henri E. Cauvin and Debbi Wilgoren

The D.C. administrative law judge who sued his neighborhood dry cleaner for $54 million over a pair of lost pants found out this morning what he's going to get for all his troubles.

Nothing.

In a verdict that surprised no one, except perhaps the plaintiff himself, a D.C. Superior Court judge denied Roy Pearson the big payday he claimed was his due.

Delivering her decision in writing, Judge Judith Bartnoff wrote 23 pages dissecting and dismissing Pearson's claim that he was defrauded by the owners of Custom Cleaners and their "Satisfaction Guaranteed" sign.

"A reasonable consumer would not interpret 'Satisfaction Guaranteed' to mean that a merchant is required to satisfy a customer's unreasonable demands or to accede to demands that the merchant has reasonable grounds to dispute," the ruling said. " . . . The plaintiff is not entitled to any relief whatsoever."

It was a pointed rebuke of Pearson's claim, and came with an order to pay the cleaners' court costs. But even bigger troubles may loom for Pearson.

Financially, he could soon be on the hook for tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees incurred by the owners of Customer Cleaners. Attorneys for the Chungs have said they will seek such payments, as well as sanctions against Pearson for bringing the lawsuit. Bartnoff said in her ruling that she would decide those issues after both sides have filed their motions, counter-motions and legal briefs.

Professionally, Pearson could find himself out of his $96,000-a-year job as an administrative law judge for the District government.

All that is certain right now is that he won't be getting the multi-million dollar payout he demanded when he filed suit in 2005 against Soo Chung and her husband, the owners of Custom Cleaners.

No one, not even Pearson argued that his pants were actually worth $54 million. The whole suit had cost just over a thousands dollars, and letting out the waist, as Pearson had asked the cleaners to do, was only going to cost him $10.50.

But this case -- decried by both trial lawyers and the defense bar -- was, to Pearson, about far more than the pair of pants.

It was about safeguarding the rights of every consumer in the District who, Pearson argued, might fall prey to signs like those once posted in Custom Cleaners. Satisfaction was in fact not guaranteed, Pearson argued, and his own experience put the lie to the supposed promise.

For years, Pearson had been a customer of Custom Cleaners, the only dry cleaners in easy walking distance of his home in the Northeast Washington neighborhood of Fort Lincoln. Even after a squabble several years ago over another pair of lost pants, Pearson continued to patronize the Bladensburg Road NE business.

So when Pearson was hired in April 2005 to be an administrative law judge and needed to have all of his suit trousers altered, he went to Custom Cleaners to have the work done.

Until he landed the judgeship, Pearson had been out of work. Strapped for cash and running up close to his limit on his credit cards, he brought his pants in one or two at a time to avoid maxing out his credit.

On May 3, he brought in the pants he planned to wear three days later. But on May 5, the pants were not ready, and the next day, May 6, they were nowhere to be found.

A week later Soo Chung found what she said were the missing pants. But Pearson said they were not the pants he had left to be altered. Not only was the pattern different, but the pants proffered as his had of all things, cuffs. Only once in his adult life, he said, had he worn cuffed pants, and never, he suggested, would he have so defiled his treasured Hickey Freeman suits.

Pearson demanded $1,150 to buy a new suit. When that didn't fly with the Chungs, Pearson swung into action, filing a lawsuit that would eventually make him the talk of the town and fodder for late-night comedy.

Along the way, he rejected offers to settle, first for $3,000 , then for $4,600 and finally for $12,000. A judge headed off Pearson's efforts to turn the case into a sort of sweeping class-action suit and tried to rein in his "excessive" demands for documents. But the judge found he could not simply dismiss the claim, and that meant Roy L. Pearson Jr. vs. Soo Chung et al. was going to trial.

By the time it did, on June 12, it was in the hands, a new judge, Bartnoff, and it lived up to its billing. Media hordes descended, including television crews from Korea, where the Chungs were born. CNN updated its viewers frequently.

A dozen witnesses testified. One, called on behalf of the plaintiff, compared the dry cleaners to the Nazis.

When Pearson testified, he lost his composure and began to cry.

When she took the witness stand, Soo Chung did the same.