Reuters- The judge who sued his dry cleaning shop for US$54 million over a lost pair of trousers said as the trial wrapped up on Wednesday that he would use any winnings he might get to encourage others to follow suit.
Roy L. Pearson, an administrative judge for the District of Columbia, said he only needed $2.5 million for himself to cover the emotional distress he suffered after Custom Cleaners misplaced a pair of pants he brought in for alteration.
The remainder, he said, would be used "as an incentive for other attorneys in private practice to take on these kinds of cases."
District of Columbia Judge Judith Bartnoff said she would issue a written decision within a week in the case.
Pearson's lawsuit has drawn international ridicule. It also drew plenty of chuckles from spectators who crowded into the stuffy municipal courtroom.
Even Bartnoff had a hard time keeping a straight face as Pearson, wearing a gray pinstripe suit and a stained lavender tie, wielded a 6-inch-thick (15-cm-thick) binder of laws and court decisions that he said bolstered his case.
Shop owner Soo Chung, an immigrant from South Korea, was not so amused.
"Economically, emotionally, and health-wise as well, it's been extremely hard for us," Chung said through an interpreter as she broke down crying. It has cost tens of thousands of dollars to defend against the lawsuit, with a quarter of that covered by donations, a spokeswoman said.
Pearson claims a "satisfaction guaranteed" sign at the dry cleaning shop violates a consumer-protection law because he was unsatisfied with the response of Chung and her husband and son when they misplaced his pants in 2005.
The Chungs say they located the pants a few days later, but Pearson said they were not his.
The pants in question -- gray, with cuffs -- hung by the witness stand as the Chungs' attorney questioned whether Pearson's interpretation of the sign was reasonable.
"Does the sign read: 'If you are not satisfied with our service, you the customer can ask for whatever you want, including $67 million, and you will receive it'?" attorney Chris Manning asked.
Pearson, who reduced an original demand for $67 million to $54 million last month, arrived at the figured based on fines accruing for the four years allowed under the statute of limitations and other costs, such as $15,000 to rent a car to use another dry cleaning shop.
Bartnoff seemed skeptical as well, poking holes in Pearson's legal reasoning on many occasions.
"This is a very important statute to protect consumers of the District of Columbia. It's also very important that statutes like this are not misused," Bartnoff said.
Wonder any one will try such stunt in Singapore.
