Deeper into the Surreal

Is it just me or is life truly turning surreal now?
I mean you've got Paris Hilton in jail suddenly finding religion and voicing concern for our troops in the war zone. You've got conflicts breaking out all over the world. And most importantly, you've got the case of the $54 million pants. Judge Roy Pearson, who I've written about in the past continues to make headlines over his efforts to sue a dry cleaning business for apparent false advertising and mental distress. Personally, what I find most distressing in this case is the fact that it's even in court in the first place. To hear Pearson's testimony and arguements (he's representing himself here since no one probably wanted to take the case, even the cheap lawyers) one would think he's out to save the legal system of the United States. Instead, he is making a veritable mockery of it.

Pearson contends that the signs that were hung in the store that promised "Same Day Service" and "Satisfaction Guaranteed" were false promises that the Chung family (who own the dry cleaning business) should be held accountable for. Based on the fact that they lost his pants (though they were later found and offered back to Pearson with compensation well in excess of the actual value of the pants) Pearson did some number crunching and came up with a total of $54 million for the case. If one were to examine the breakdown of the requested money, one will see that Pearson was seeking compensation not only for the pants but numerous other 'expenses' that would have been occured thanks to the Chungs. This included compensation for violating the better business practices rules in DC, legal fees, mental distress fees, and cost of renting a car to go to another dry cleaner across town. Okay. What?!?

Yup, you read that right. Apparently the Chungs have caused Pearson so much anguish that he feels justified in going to another dry cleaner. Okay, that makes sense, you don't like the service, go someplace else. To sue for the cost of legal fees involved in the case, okay, makes sense. To sue for wanting to go someplace else? A bit of a stretch but okay, I get it. To sue for the cost of renting a car to go to the aforementioned other dry cleaners? That's just stupid. The judge in this case has agreed to render a verdict by the end of the week and I for one hope that he doesn't accept this compensation package. If he rules in favor of Pearson (which is a possibility) he still shouldn't accept the costs as Pearson has laid them out.

This would help set a dangerous precedent because from henceforth, people could sue for things that they deem necessary. I mean I could sue my local Pizza place for not serving me authentic Italian pizza despite their claims that they offer pizzas 'just like the old country.' Well I didn't think it was. I am going to sue them for the cost of a roundtrip first class ticket to and from Rome every week so that I can truly experience authentic pizza. I will further sue for additional compensation over the fact that I was caused mental distress in tasting fake pizza being passed off as true Italian pizza. Plus I will have to see a taste-ologist to have my tastebuds examined for permanent damage. $54 million? Pah! I can make a billion off of this case.

Pearson apparently broke down on the stand when he spoke about how the pants that the Chungs claimed to be his were revealed to be someone else's pants. He cried that he just wanted his pants back. He cried?!? I mean if the saying is that one should 'never cry over spilt milk' then what do you think they say about lost pants. Were they his lucky pants? Then shouldn't he also be suing for millions and millions more in lost revenue? I mean if they were his lucky pants then think of the number of lottery tickets he could have won, instead he's still in the same boat.

I can understand Pearson's desire to bring this case to court and I can understand his wanting to represent others who may have received shoddy service from the Chungs but I don't understand his proclamations that he represents the beleagured residents of Fort Washington in their fight against the tyranny of the Chungs. Where are we? Back in 18th century Washington getting ready to declare our independence from the British? I've said it before and I'll say it again. This case needs to be thrown out of court and Pearson's standing as a judge needs to be examined. As a judge of administrative law, he should have better judgement than what he's shown thus far.