A $54 million lawsuit for a missing pair of pants has led to the dismissal of an administrative law judge in Washington, D.C.
In 2005, Judge Roy Pearson, who I wrote about in a previous blog entry, brought five suits to a dry cleaning service Soo and Jin Chung owned. The Chungs apparently lost the pants to one of the suits. In response, Pearson filed a whopping $67 million lawsuit, which he later reduced to $54 million.
Despite almost universal condemnation, Pearson soldiered on in a one-man quest to make the Chungs accountable for losing his pants. He calculated his losses by adding up years of the Chung’s alleged legal violations and $2 million in fraud claims. Pearson also asked the court to award him legal fees amounting to $546,000, even though he represented himself.
After losing the lawsuit, Pearson appealed to the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals to have the decision reconsidered. The appeal is pending.
On May 2, 2007, Judge Pearson’s tenure as a judge expired. And, perhaps in response to the unfavorable publicity the lawsuit brought upon the city, the Washington D.C. Commission on Selection and Tenure of Administrative Law Judges declined to reappoint him.
In the meantime, the Chungs closed the shop involved in the dispute. At one point, they even considered moving back to South Korea, where Mr. Chung once worked in a charcoal factory. With their legal fees over $100,000, and mounting daily, their plight is a textbook case for asset protection planning.
If someone like the former Judge Pearson ever sues you, you’ll wish you had a "financial fortress" in place that can’t be touched, even if you lose. And there are plenty of options open to you—read more about them here.
Copyright © 2007 by Mark Nestmann
