Actions

::Pearson v. Chung

::concepts



{{#invoke:Infobox|infobox}} {{#invoke:Italic title|main}} Pearson v. Chung, better known as the "pants lawsuit",<ref>Paul Courson {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=news }}</ref> is a civil case filed in 2005 by Roy L. Pearson, Jr., an administrative law judge in the District of Columbia in the United States, following a dispute with a dry cleaning company over a lost pair of trousers. Pearson filed suit against Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung, the owners of Custom Cleaners in Washington, D.C., initially demanding $67 million for inconvenience, mental anguish and attorney's fees for representing himself, as a result of their failure, in Pearson's opinion, to live up to a "satisfaction guaranteed" sign that was displayed in the store. The case drew international attention<ref name="APJul9">Lubna Takruri, "Judge Who Lost $54M Suit Not Giving Up Pants Fight", Associated Press, 2007-07-09</ref><ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=news }}</ref> when it went to trial in 2007 and has been held up as an example of frivolous litigation and the need for tort reform in the United States.<ref>American Tort Reform Association, press release, 2007-06-25</ref>


Pearson v. Chung sections
Intro   Lawsuit    Cultural impact    See also    References    External links   

PREVIOUS: IntroNEXT: Lawsuit
<<>>

Pearson::title    Court::court    Pants::chung    Judge::district    Lawsuit::first    Chungs::pants

{{#invoke:Infobox|infobox}} {{#invoke:Italic title|main}} Pearson v. Chung, better known as the "pants lawsuit",<ref>Paul Courson {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=news }}</ref> is a civil case filed in 2005 by Roy L. Pearson, Jr., an administrative law judge in the District of Columbia in the United States, following a dispute with a dry cleaning company over a lost pair of trousers. Pearson filed suit against Soo Chung, Jin Nam Chung and Ki Y. Chung, the owners of Custom Cleaners in Washington, D.C., initially demanding $67 million for inconvenience, mental anguish and attorney's fees for representing himself, as a result of their failure, in Pearson's opinion, to live up to a "satisfaction guaranteed" sign that was displayed in the store. The case drew international attention<ref name="APJul9">Lubna Takruri, "Judge Who Lost $54M Suit Not Giving Up Pants Fight", Associated Press, 2007-07-09</ref><ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=news }}</ref> when it went to trial in 2007 and has been held up as an example of frivolous litigation and the need for tort reform in the United States.<ref>American Tort Reform Association, press release, 2007-06-25</ref>


Pearson v. Chung sections
Intro   Lawsuit    Cultural impact    See also    References    External links   

PREVIOUS: IntroNEXT: Lawsuit
<<>>