Lawsuit leads cleaners
to give up store
to give up store
The Chung family that was the target of a $54 million lawsuit over a pair of
lost pants has sold their Washington, DC, drycleaning business.
The Chungs were vindicated in the drawn-out lawsuit when a District of Columbia
Superior Court judge ruled in their favor last June. At first, they planned to
counter sue to recover thousands of dollars of legal fees that Roy Pearson
’s lawsuit had cost them, but after successful fundraising efforts on their
behalf helped meet those costs, they said they would drop their suit and hoped
Pearson would drop his.
Pearson appealed anyway, guaranteeing that the case will drag on into next year.
On Sept. 19, the Chung’s attorney, Chris Manning, announced that the family had sold Custom Cleaners
because of the revenue loss and emotional toll caused by the notorious lawsuit.
“This is truly a tragic example of how devastating frivolous litigation can be to
the American people and to small business,
” Manning said. “This family has poured its heart and soul into their drycleaning stores only to
have their dreams crushed by Roy Pearson
’s lawsuit.”
“Even though we were resoundingly victorious at trial, the damage was basically
already done to the Chungs when Mr. Pearson filed and then bafflingly continued
to pursue his lawsuit.
”
Custom Cleaners is the second cleaning business the Chungs have given up since
the lawsuit was filed. They now plan to focus on running their remaining
business, Happy Cleaners.
Ironically, Pearson was a customer of the Chungs because he did not own a car
and Custom Cleaners was the only cleaners within walking distance of his home.
Part of the damages he claimed in his lawsuit was the cost of renting a car so
he could drive to another cleaners.
Pearson had been a customer at Custom Cleaners before he filed his lawsuit in
2005 over a pair of pants that he claimed the cleaner had lost. The Chungs
countered that they did not lose the pants and that Pearson refused to accept
the pants when they were presented to him.
Pearson initially asked for $1,150 to cover the cost of the pants and to fulfill
the promise of a
“Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign posted at Custom Cleaners. During the course of two years of litigation,
Pearson
’s demand inflated to $67 million, which he scaled back to $54 million before the
case went to trial in June.
Pearson contended that the satisfaction guaranteed sign was an unconditional
warranty that required the Chungs to honor any claim by any customer, without
limitation, based on the customer
’s determination of whatever would make him “satisfied.”
Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff disagreed and sided with the Chungs in her
ruling.
“A reasonable consumer would not interpret ‘Satisfaction Guaranteed’ to mean that a merchant is required to satisfy a customer’s unreasonable demands or to accede to demands that the merchant has reasonable
grounds to dispute,
” Bartnoff wrote in her decision.
Reasonable or not, Pearson decided to pursue his right to appeal. The District
of Columbia Court of Appeals should hear the case sometime in 2008.
Meanwhile, Pearson is also appealing to keep his $100,000-a-year job as an
administrative law judge in the District of Columbia. The city commission that
reviews the performance of administrative law judges recommended that Pearson
not be reappointed.
