Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog

So depressing!

What's particularly troublesome is that this guy is not only a lawyer but some kind of administrative law judge. Hopefully when he comes up for review with that body they will take a serious look at his actions.

I couldn't agree with Sam and Ben more. By the way, Sam has a great blog at and website at http://www.vamedmal.com/. There is a great deal of information for personal injury victims and their lawyers.

Crazy. Apparently, Roy Pearson loves litigation on just about every level. Check out this article on his wife's divorce!

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=va&vol=0561044&invol=1

You are absolutely right. It does reflect on not only trial lawyers but lawyers generally.

Is there a case for the dry cleaner to countersuit for "terror and threat" that caused mental anguish etc?

I disagree. advocates would not recreate such a ridiculous case. this case has been brought up because of one man's dejection of (the simplest) common sense.

even a jury would immediately feel the same way, regardless if they were exposed to the public's reaction.

if you still (truly) believe your first claim, then why don't you start a 90 million case against an anonymous dry cleaners?

Response to two comments: Jon's - the short answer to the "threat and terror" question is not really. Because he may have a technical claim, I think he would be safe from any malicious prosecution case although he is clearly abusing the process.

RB's - This comment I really do not understand. First, obviously when someone says that if someone did not exist, advocates would make this person up, that is not meant to be taken literally. The last question I really don't understand. I am not a tort reform advocate, so I would not make such a person up, of course. I would not file such a claim because I think it is a ridiculous claim that makes all lawyers look bad.

In many ways, the right to file a lawsuit is like free speech. You can file pretty much any claim you want that has some foundation in fact even if reasonable people would find it inane.

Update: $67 Million Dry Cleaning Case

On May 31, 2007, D.C. Administrative Law Judge, Roy L. Pearson, filed a Pre-Trial Brief in the Pearson v. Chung dry cleaner case. In the brief, Pearson shifts the focus of his claims from his allegedly lost pants to claims related to signage in the Chungs’ store. One sign reads “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and another reads “Same Day Service.” Pearson claims the signs are somehow misleading and apparently continues to seek over $54,000,000 in damages from the Chungs. Pearson had previously sought $67,000,000 in compensation from the Chungs.

Christopher Manning, of the law firm Manning & Sossamon in Washington D.C., represents the Chungs and made the following statement in response to Pearson's recent actions:

"Although it is always encouraging to see claims withdrawn, it is simply baffling that Mr. Pearson continues to assert that he is entitled to tens of millions of dollars as a result of two completely harmless, completely straight-forward signs. Mr. Pearson's claims are not founded in common sense and are extraordinarily abusive towards the Chungs. As a result, the Chungs' terrible ordeal continues. The Chungs' decision to move to and build a business in America began with the classic American dream. Mr. Pearson has turned that dream into an American nightmare."

Mr. Pearson's lawsuit has cost the Chungs tens of thousands of dollars in defense costs. Donations to a defense fund set up by the Chungs may be made at www.customcleanersdefensefund.com.
This case will be tried in courtroom 415 of the District of Columbia Superior Courthouse on June 11th and 12th beginning at 9:30am each day.

All questions regarding the matter should be directed to the office of Manning & Sossamon at:

Manning & Sossamon PLLC
1532 Sixteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 387-2228 (voice)
(202) 387-2229 (fax)
chungdefense@manning-sossamon.com

I think this case is a complete mess. I can honestly say that this man has made a joke of the legal system and people who are trying to be ethical legal workers. I feel bad for the family he is taking through this situation. He should be disbarred and never allowed to practice law again. Once the jury decides that he should not be awarded any money, they should make him pay the legal fees of this family and pay millions of dollars for their pain and suffering. Please, to get up in the court room and shed tears (as reported on t.v. today) over a pair of slacks is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. He should be on t.v. practicing law with the dramtics instead of a real courtroom.

If this judge is allowed to keep his robes, think about how many people are going to be suing over such trite affairs in his district...Pearson has already proven his disposition toward "satisfaction guaranteed" and will rule for the plantiff. Wow, it might even be worth me moving to his district so that I get a chance to legally sue somebody for a paultry 1 million dollars. hmmm.

Whoa. Hold up there. Heck, this guy might have a technical claim but are his damages? My guess is nothing or very little. Certainly not enough to justify the effort of filing the case. Just wait and see, I'll bet this case ends the right way...

The only compensation Pearson should get is a trip to the psychiatrist's. Perhaps "Fraser" will relieve his a**hole habit and reinject some real sense of comedy back into his clown-like existence. I'm sure He will get a show in Hollywood, where freaks usually get the nod.

Jacob Chen
University of Toronto

It is very absurd and unreasonable for an American judge to toe a line like that. He is seen as a man that represent legal American in all ramification. I see know sense in what i call a "show of shame". If a man that reperesent the legal law in this country can act like that, how many similar cases would he have in the past tried wrongly. People get discouraged by singular act of people like this in our society, who choose to use their power to victimize their fellow American citizens.