Posted on 05/17/2007 8:59:03 AM PDT by MrLegalReform
America’s broken lawsuit system is hurting our nation’s small businesses.
That statement won’t surprise anyone who has heard the saga of the D.C. judge and his $65 million pants suit. If ever there was a frivolous lawsuit, this is it.
But is the Drycleaner case a curious anomaly? Unfortunately, no.
(Excerpt) Read more at instituteforlegalreform.com ...
Easy to say until you suffer a true wrong and your only help will be from the trial lawyer representing you.
Isn’t john edwards a trial lawyer?
Yep!
You mean toss them out by the seat of their pants.
After all it’s not a full suit
Lawsuit to Form Backbone of Edwards’ Economic Strategy
The $10 dry cleaning bill for a pair of trousers that ballooned into a $67 million civil lawsuit was cited by presidential candidate and former Senator John Edwards (D-NC) as “an example for how we can restore economic justice and prosperity to America.” “Here we have an individual who is standing up against exploitation by an unscrupulous business and fighting for his rights,” Edwards exclaimed. “His fight is both an inspiration and a model for the way America will operate if I am its next president.”
The lawsuit was launched by Roy Pearson, a judge and lawyer in Washington, D.C., when a dry cleaner lost his favorite trousers. “I cannot convey to you how devastated I am by this cruel abuse of my fundamental human rights,” Pearson says in his court filing. “I had planned to wear these pants on my first day on the bench after my appointment as a judge. This once-in-a-lifetime opportunity was stolen from me. My life has been irreparably diminished as a result.”
Named in the suit are Korean immigrants Jin and Soo Chung and their son, who own “Custom Cleaners” and two other dry cleaning shops in Washington, D.C.
Pearson claims to be so traumatized by the experience that “I may never be able to trust another human being again.” “I am hoping that I can begin to piece my life back together,” said Pearson. “It is essential that I be awarded sufficient means to do so. It is also important that we send a stern message to corporate wrongdoers so that others will not have to go through what I’ve had to suffer.”
“Cracking down on this type of abuse by this dry-cleaner will enable my administration to implement social justice without having to raise taxes,” Edwards said. “It’s a simple process of transferring money from wealthy undeserving miscreants to injured and underprivileged victims. If we can do this on a broad enough scale, poverty will be a thing of the past.”
Calling his plan a “no-brainer,” Edwards admitted to being a little embarrassed that it took him so long to see that lawsuits like this could be the key to revitalizing the economy. “I’m kicking myself for not glomming onto this idea sooner,” Edwards said. “After all, I’ve been deeply involved in similar legal actions that have turned out to be very rewarding. I guess I was too narrowly focused on my own success.”
Edwards observed that a “byproduct of my plan for social justice is the fact that trial lawyers, the hard-working backbone of our society, will likely be assured of full-employment. It’s a real win-win scenario for America.”
read more...
http://www.azconservative.org/Column_Archives.htm
To think that this judge is going to be sitting on the bench in this mental frame of mind is horrifying!
I was the victim of a false, malicious lawsuit in 1998. Cost me 50K to win it, and the lawyer who filed it did so purely for racial reasons (long story). That lawer lost his job, went on the be the editor for a local ‘black newspaper’ and then filled Marc Mallory’s vacant state senate seat when Mallory became mayor of Cincinnati.
The lawyer’s name was Eric Kerney. A despicable racial hate monger of the worst sort.
Bump for later reading.
‘There has not been a single day in the past sixteen years that my business hasn’t been defending itself in some stage of a lawsuit. To date, every suit concluded with a dismissal - complete exoneration.’
Thankfully, we haven’t had that kind of litigation, a couple of minor lawsuits - cost of doing bidness - but thats it.
The exception was the absurd lawsuit filed against me personally in 1998. The good news is the couple that sued lost big time, had wages garnished, credit records destroyed, divorced, lost their house, and he went into coke rehab a couple of times. Oh, and the wife is now hunting him down for back child support...plus he remarried a woman thats a virtual ‘twin sister’ and had two more kids....
Not that I take joy in the troubles of others....(chuckle)
But karma does come back around.
That's what they say. I'd give up the satisfaction of any retribution if I could live to witness the Clinton's getting their just desserts.
Hmmm. Maybe I have been lucky in this regard to avoid lawsuits by trial lawyaers, especially since I own a pretty big marketing engine.
However, what I have felt pain on is the local IRS office who raped the business with penalties and fines (later to return almost all of it) after self-reporting a problem. Also, female employees whom when fired for incompetence, come and try to sue for Sexual Harrasment.
BUMP
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.