What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy casts another employee in holiday campaign. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Jarice Brodie has done some cool things in his life. Next: Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
248 Comments
- Speaking, on 10/12/2007, -6/+222Not being able to post the numbers sucks, but remember who causes the fear of lawsuits... ***** lawyers, lets get this guy disbarred.
- griz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+155Of course he isn't, he has no pants.
- n0xz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+103What has the American Justice system came through ? This ***** is unfit to be a judge.
- xmetal, on 10/12/2007, -4/+95I sincerely hope that this asshat is completely ruined by his frivolous case and ends up homeless and starving in a box somewhere. Truly unfit to be human, let alone a judge.
- deviouskoopa, on 10/12/2007, -9/+99"The ABC News Law & Justice Unit has calculated that for $67 million Pearson could buy 84,115 new pairs of pants at the $800 value he placed on the missing trousers in court documents. 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."
Is this paragraph in any way necessary? The ABC News L&J Unit sure has proven it's value in this investigation... - fuzzYogHurt, on 10/12/2007, -3/+88Don't judges still wear robes? He didn't even need pants!
- meetthescott, on 10/12/2007, -0/+77"The business owners claim they have his pants, but he's pressing ahead with his suit. "
...pun overload... - coolian, on 10/12/2007, -10/+87Ah...I've finally found what ??? is supposed to mean:
1. Wear (under)pants
2. Sue the bastard who lost your pants into oblivion
3. Profit! - GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -17/+85Didn't you read the article? They LOST his PANTS!
- jhbarr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+59@washingtonydc
Evidently, he did this to his ex-wife during their divorce and ended up having to pay lawyer's fees.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=va&vol=0561044&invol=1 - fotd42, on 10/12/2007, -4/+61This douchebag certainly is taking a gamble. If he wins, he'll most likely (hopefully) get disbarred but he will also have $67 million to retire with. If he loses (which will make me realize there is a god and bad things in actuality DO happen to bad people) he gets disbarred and ends up slobbing knobs for coke in alleyways.
If an American judge can sue an immigrant family for $67 million for an $800 pair of pants, the terrorists have finally won. - digginant23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+55This judge needs to be disbarred. Someone should sue him for making a mockery of the legal system.
- AJH16, on 10/12/2007, -0/+41@KMye
They offered him over $1500 for what he claimed were $800 pants. - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+40I can think of a fitting top to go with those pants -- long white sleeves that wrap around the back, padlock _not_ optional.
- ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+39Maybe he had $67Million in his pants pocket?
Or maybe he's just an asshat? - ELee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+36Take a look at this letter to the editor of the Washington Post.
The Travesty of the Trousers Case
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/29/AR2007042901149_2.html
As a lawyer and former administrative law judge, I am particularly aggrieved by District administrative law judge Roy Pearson's $65 million lawsuit against Custom Cleaners after the neighborhood dry cleaner misplaced one pair of his pants. The manifest absurdity of it is too obvious to require explanation.
If I were adjudicating the case, I would not only grant a motion to dismiss it but would also order Mr. Pearson to reimburse the owners of Custom Cleaners for all their expenses in defending it and to pay them several million dollars for their "mental suffering, inconvenience and discomfort."
I would also direct any bar to which Mr. Pearson belongs to immediately disbar him and the District to remove him from his position as an administrative law judge. Perhaps a class action by the D.C. Bar Association for the damage he has done to the legal profession might also be appropriate.
MELVIN WELLES
Alexandria - washingtonydc, on 10/12/2007, -4/+38It is important to remember that this suit will most likely not prevail. Even if it were, many jurisdictions allow for appellate courts to reduce the amount of damages if they seem completely crazy.
As the judge in the case said, FTA:"The Court has significant concerns that the plaintiff is acting in bad faith and with an intent to delay the proceedings," the judge wrote in court papers. "Indeed, it is difficult to draw any other conclusion, given the plaintiff's lengthy delay in seeking to expand the scope of the case, the breathtaking magnitude of the expansion he seeks, his failure to present any evidence in support of the thousands of claims he says he wishes to add, and his misrepresentation concerning the scope of his first amended complaint."
This suit (har har har) is ripe for a Rule 11 motion. http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule11.htm - meltingrobot, on 10/12/2007, -5/+38I hope the judge doesn't use the famous Chewbacca defense.
- griz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+32Judges don't need pants, that's what they have robes for.
- jacinth, on 10/12/2007, -3/+32I don't understand the reasoning of this judge. Did he not have any clue that people would look at this with utter disdain and contempt? That people would ridicule him for trying to take advantage of the legal system? Or is he that egotistical that he had no doubt that he could win?
Even if the suit is thrown out (as it should be), who knows what the legal fees are that the defendants have to pay? Even if they then countersue the judge, that still drags out this entire debacle - leading to more lawyer fees.
Basically, the only winners here are the lawyers, no matter what happens. - diggEntertainer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+29Please go back to MySpace. Thanks.
- CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28"It was May 2005 and Pearson was about to begin his new job as an administrative judge. Naturally, he wanted to wear a nice outfit to his first day of work. He said in court papers that he tried on five Hickey Freeman suits from his closet, but found them all to be "too tight," according to the Washington Post."
How about you get some exercise and quit stuffing your face, ya ***** fat ass. - jhbarr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26He will hopefully be disbarred or at least lose his job as a judge. Complaints are already being made..
http://www.overlawyered.com/2007/05/the_65_million_pants_judge_roy.html - MercedRocks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Do a good deed for the day and call him and leave a message on his answering machine telling him what a jerk he is.
http://digg.com/offbeat_news/Call_the_Judge_suing_for_69_million_dollars_for_a_lost_pair_of_pants - asaturn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25First ask yourself this question: is our children learning?
- bluechips23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21I hope they burn his underwear next time.
- linuxdaemon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20Those pants really tied the outfit together.
- bdpf, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Wants to wear pants on the first day on the bench. It should have been his first and last day in any cort.
Pull his papers and let him earn a honest livening. Head legal thief. - kefler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19"In the criminal justice system, cases are solved by three separate yet equally important groups: The detectives who investigate crimes, the district attorneys who prosecute them, and the ABC Law and Justice team who measures their pants and calculates distances based on them. These are their stories."
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Or maybe if YOU read the REST of the article, you would realize that's just one silly part of it.
- Eivo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23Retarded.
- devoss, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18"The ABC News Law & Justice Unit has calculated that for $67 million Pearson could buy 84,115 new pairs of pants at the $800 value he placed on the missing trousers in court documents. 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."
That's 36" wide, or a 72" waist line. That's one FAT judge! - JohnSteel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16It isn't about winning the lawsuit or about getting money. It's about harassment.
- Wonkanobi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19That must be one amazing pair of slacks!!!
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16And they did. They even offered to give him $4400 for the pants at one point. And within a week, found the pants! He's just being a ***** *****.
There's a list of people who need to DIAF. He is one of them. - TheMidnight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16This lends new meaning to the phrase "sue someone's pants off."
- MacGyver2210, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14I wonder if I could do the same thing with a laundromat with those signs in the window because their dryers always seem to eat one of my socks...
- bastardo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Wow, the US legal system seems more ***** up every day.
- zephris, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14This isn't a lawsuit. It's revenge. That store isn't worth that much money so it'll have to close and the owners will go to jail since it's not a Corporate Entity or an LLC. This judge is an ***** and needs to taken down.
- MercedRocks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Whats sucks is all the money this poor Korean immigrant family has had to spend because some jerkoff fatass doesnt have the time to iron his own godam pants yet has plenty of time to sue somebody for not doing it exactly to his desire.
- rebopper, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17I always go back to my dream of being a sniper when I hear of nonsensical people like this.
- CedEx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I can see that in court...
Cleaners: ... and for our counter claim, we're asking for the death penalty.
Judge: Sir, you can't sue for the death penalty.
Cleaners: Really? I didn't think I could get sued $67M for an $800 pair of pants, and yet... here we are?!
Judge: Hmmm...you do have a logical point... - zephris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Valued that much or not, it's not the business's responsibility to pay him to go to another store. Can't wait until the judge for this case ridicules him into oblivion. He's the right kind of person for Bush to nominate somewhere
- trer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Good job making lawyers look bad. With idiots like this guy and Jack Thompson, how will lawyers ever improve the reputation of their chosen field?
- feb420, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I don't think that costs 67 million dollars...
- Lnomis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10If I saw this guy on the street, I honestly think I'd spit on him.
- d3c0yn4m3l355, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11or they could use his pants to hang him with it. Then atleast they are useful for once. This is really beyond believe, imagine being the Chungs, for sure you are in an awkward position. You don't understand the language, whats going on nor how to solve it. Also at the end that the Chongs offered him big money to solve the problems, and still considering to turn it down. I hope he gets disbarred, thrown into jail and hangs himself there.
- jeremy66158, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Maybe the power has gone to his head?
- MacGyver2210, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Yes, they're the department of ABC that does statistics on the thickness, width, and span of countless pairs of pants...
Wait, what? - MadMaxx426, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9"Don't forget someone actually won millions of dollars from mcdonalds or something for spilling their hot coffee on their junk because it didn't say 'Hot' on the cup..."
That older lady had coffee, which was boiling, spilled on her producing 3rd degree burns on her crotch and thighs. All she wanted from McD's was to HELP with her medical bills (not even pay for all of it), something like 500$. They refused, so when they finally went to court to get the medical bills (all they were seeking) covered, the jury told the big arches to get ***** and gave her millions.
I love it when people use that comment like it's supposed to show weakness in the system. If anything, it shows that big companies don't give a *****, but juries can sure lay the smack down.
Oh, and this guys suit (ha) is ***** all around. -
Show 51 - 100 of 249 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is