Judicial Arrogance: The $65 Million Pants

There was a time, perhaps, when judges deserved respect. But today, given the foul behavior and incomprehensible decisions made by many on the bench, what they deserve is a few tough questions before we determine whether respect is due.

No respect is due Judge Roy L. Peterson, an administrative law judge in DC. Peterson has never held an honest job. Since he graduated from law school, he's spent time hearing police complaints and providing legal assistance to DC indigents through a non-profit. Now he hears cases in which one bloated, inefficient city of DC agency has a gripe with another incompetent, overstaffed DC agency.

He's never worked for a business or even a law firm. He's a welfare and big government guy with no appreciation or sympathy for common working people.

And as a black, it appears he suffers from the deeply racist feelings many blacks have towards Koreans.

WASHINGTON (May 3) -- The Chungs, immigrants from South Korea, realized their American dream when they opened their dry-cleaning business seven years ago in the nation's capital. For the past two years, however, they've been dealing with the nightmare of litigation: a $65 million lawsuit over a pair of missing pants.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are so disheartened that they're considering moving back to Seoul, said their attorney, Chris Manning, who spoke on their behalf.

"They're out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system," Manning said. "This has destroyed their lives."

The lawsuit was filed by a District of Columbia administrative hearings judge, Roy Pearson, who has been representing himself in the case.

Pearson did not return phone calls and e-mails Wednesday from The Associated Press requesting comment. [So he's a coward too!]

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alteration to Custom Cleaners in Northeast Washington, a place he patronized regularly despite previous disagreements with the Chungs. A pair of pants from one suit was not ready when he requested it two days later, and was deemed to be missing.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay. That's when Pearson decided to sue.

Manning said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson. First they offered $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000. But Pearson wasn't satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, part of his lawsuit calls for $15,000 -- the price to rent a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

"He's somehow purporting that he has a constitutional right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment," Manning said.

But the bulk of the $65 million comes from Pearson's strict interpretation of D.C.'s consumer protection law, which fines violators $1,500 per violation, per day. According to court papers, Pearson added up 12 violations over 1,200 days, and then multiplied that by three defendants.

Much of Pearson's case rests on two signs that Custom Cleaners once had on its walls: "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."

Based on Pearson's dissatisfaction and the delay in getting back the pants, he claims the signs amount to fraud. ...

To the Chungs and their attorney, one of the most frustrating aspects of the case is their claim that Pearson's gray pants were found a week after Pearson dropped them off in 2005. They've been hanging in Manning's office for more than a year. (source)

Here's an idea! Let's round up Pearson's former indigent clients and ask them if they were satisfied, and if their cases were handled in a reasonable time frame. Not that it would matter to this narcissist; it's only his rectal output that doesn't smell.

Surely, Pearson is in the slimy contamination that's at the bottom of America's legal sump, but he's not alone there. Like many others, he uses his profession as a club, he is incapable of balanced reasoning and he sees the law as a weapon for exploitation, not a tool for peaceful resolution.

He is a product of the entitlement culture, where, devoid of any compass but his own self-satisfaction, he grabs for anything he can get for himself, without a care for others. Every year, hundreds of people just like him graduate from our law and business schools, ready to use society for their own souless, remorseless purposes.

They are joined by equal numbers of young graduates of government administration programs, determined to nourish and expand the entitlement system that makes judges like Roy Peterson not just possible, but all too prevalent.

G9d help us.

hat-tip: Jim