Aww, pants!

May 2, 2007 8:25 PM

Meet Roy L. Pearson, Jr.. He's suing a small mom-and-pop dry cleaning business for damages regarding the loss of his prized pantaloons. Nice trousers, to be sure, but are they worth $67 million? Apparently, Mr. Pearson has a history of litigious lunacy (txt file). For more on frivolous lawsuits, check out these articles written by America's sweetheart Seanbaby!
posted by aftermarketradio (28 comments total)

"Plaintiff Roy Pearson, a judge in Washington, D.C., says in court papers that he's been through the ringer ..."

Surely it's the wringer?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:28 PM on May 2, 2007 [1 favorite]

If you really, really wanted to be famous, would it be better to be unknown, or to be this guy?
posted by facetious at 8:29 PM on May 2, 2007

i don't know what's worse, the fucktard's lawsuit or the fact that this story has been a national headline for the past week
posted by jivesoul at 8:40 PM on May 2, 2007 [1 favorite]

Digg claims to have his address and phone number. I was tempted to call him up. The arrogance and selfishness of the man is astonishing: the fact that he's clogging the poor overworked court system to press his pathetic agendas is disgusting.

Still, he's now going to have to be $69 million dollar pants man for the rest of his life. Not a really good position to be in.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:41 PM on May 2, 2007

Lord God do I wish I could comment on this. However it is not in my best interests to do so.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:52 PM on May 2, 2007

And, good god! Apparently, they were, ... pleated!!! Is he fucking crazy? Smoking gun, just sayin', y'all.
posted by theperfectcrime at 8:55 PM on May 2, 2007

"If you stacked those pants up, they would be taller than eight Mount Everests. If you laid them side by side, they would stretch for 48 miles."
So these pants had a 72 inch waist? No wonder his other pants didn't fit him.
posted by tellurian at 9:00 PM on May 2, 2007

I'm inclined to drop a few bucks into the mail for the Chungs' defense. According to the Washington Post, Custom Cleaners is located on Bladensburg Road NE in D.C., if anybody else is similarly inclined.
posted by cribcage at 9:30 PM on May 2, 2007

I can't help but think of the golden pantaloons from Baldur's Gate.
posted by Liosliath at 9:30 PM on May 2, 2007

i don't know what's worse, the fucktard's lawsuit or the fact that this story has been a national headline for the past week

I had no idea the story was news for so long. I found out about it today, did a quick search in MeFi, and posted up. Sorry for any repeats, and yes, I will shamelessly claim the "this-is-my-first-time-posting-a-topic" defense.

Also, I wholeheartedly agree that the prosecuting party is, in fact, fucktarded.

How can you ever hope to have someone perform a service for you again after this? Chauffeurs, waiters, gas station attendants, proctologists: all should be wary to help this guy for fear of litigation. Hell, I'm shaking in my boots right now for posting this, lest I be sued for my entire life savings, setting me back tens of dollars.
posted by aftermarketradio at 10:10 PM on May 2, 2007

Nice pantaloons, but I prefer bronze pantalettes!
posted by YoBananaBoy at 10:20 PM on May 2, 2007

There are rules against frivolous litigation and if I were the dry cleaner in questin not only would I be pressing (sigh) this in court, but I would also be complaining to the state bar association and to the state's high court to get his law license lifted and perhaps his judgeship removed. This guy is an embarrassment to the bar who needs to be brought down a few notches. Assholes like this provide the ammunition for the so called reformers who seek to destroy the liability law system. He wants to up the ante, fine, but in reverse, how about losing your career?

The article states that the cleaners are out legal fees. This is why you want insurance folks. The biggest benefit of insurance is often their obligation to defend you in such suits. The insurer pays the lawyers, not you.
posted by caddis at 10:52 PM on May 2, 2007

let's just hope their defense team has the compitence to file an appropriate counter suit so they can at leat get back the legal fees they've been shelling out for this rediculous fiasco.
posted by matt_od at 11:59 PM on May 2, 2007

Why does this read like a bad (I know, redundant) SNL sketch?
posted by fenriq at 12:13 AM on May 3, 2007

i don't know what's worse, the fucktard's lawsuit or the fact that this story has been a national headline for the past week

The reason is that lobbyist who are trying to destroy the usefulness of tort are using it as a poster boy for why you shouldn't be able to sue in court. They call it "tort reform."
posted by eriko at 5:01 AM on May 3, 2007

eriko, I've gotten the impression that higher tax bracket folks sue each other the way us plebes get into belly-bumping contests. If there's this hunger for tort reforms that's coming from top earners, how would those 'reforms' affect the rest of the legal system? (I'm geting the smell of fish off this story...)
posted by maryh at 6:28 AM on May 3, 2007

It was discussed in this post on dcist (and this post before that). Notably, they mention that "his reappointment to a 10-year term is scheduled to commence" recently, so hopefully he'll get the boot...
posted by inigo2 at 7:11 AM on May 3, 2007

Oh Seanbaby, you're the reason the sun rises every morning.
posted by billypilgrim at 7:24 AM on May 3, 2007

You'd think judges would be more sensitive to ridiculous time-wasting lawsuits. Fucktard.
posted by chundo at 7:34 AM on May 3, 2007

Minsc always coveted my Golden Pantaloons. Do you realize how hard it was to sleep at night knowing Boo might go for my eyes?
posted by NationalKato at 8:56 AM on May 3, 2007

Wallace and Gromit should get on this case.
posted by Midnight Creeper at 9:12 AM on May 3, 2007

Nice to know some MeFi FPPosters watch ABC's NightLine. (that was a particularly "puff piece" episode, however).
posted by spock at 9:34 AM on May 3, 2007

You'd think judges would be more sensitive to ridiculous time-wasting lawsuits.

In this case the aggrieved is a lawyer and judge. I'm guessing he knows how to work the system.
posted by spock at 9:35 AM on May 3, 2007

They're not even puffy director pants!
posted by LexRockhard at 11:56 AM on May 3, 2007

I spotted a headline indicating he's being turfed out of the company/organization/position/whatever.

Good.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:39 PM on May 3, 2007

Calm down, world. The case will get tossed, and there are additional remedies available to the defendant dry cleaner. (That a meritless case may be filed and then tossed does not mean that "tort reform" is a good idea.)
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 11:45 PM on May 3, 2007

five fresh fish: This one?
posted by dilettante at 10:25 PM on May 4, 2007

Don't know if that was it, but the gist is exactly the same:

A panel of four D.C. officials is considering the reappointment of administrative law judge Roy L. Pearson Jr. in light of devastating publicity about a court case he brought.

With any luck, he'll be only the first of many idiots bitchslapped for their greed and manipulation of the legal system.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:37 PM on May 4, 2007