Legal News

The Great American Pants Suit, R.I.P.

By Dan Slater

After several years of what many court-watchers considered the acme of frivolous litigation, The Great American Pants Suit has died on the vine. (Click here for a report from the BLT blog.)

Soo Chung, left, and Jin Chung, represented by their lawyer Chris Manning, standing, who are being sued by D.C. judge Roy Pearson, right, June 13, 2007. (AP/Dana Verkouteren)

Roy Pearson, the former administrative law judge who unsuccessfully sued his dry cleaner for $54 million over a pair of lost pants, went before the appeals court in October. He said: “This is not a case about a pair of suit pants.” Rather, it is about whether the owners of a neighborhood business misled consumers with a sign that claimed “Satisfaction Guaranteed,” he said. “There is an unconditional guarantee,” he argued, unless the merchant indicates otherwise.

By Pearson’s interpretation of the sign, the Chungs — the owners of the now-defunct Custom Cleaners — owe him $18,000 for each day the pants were missing over a nearly four-year period. In that time, Pearson’s demand went up to $67 million.

The three judge panel disagreed. In today’s opinion, Judge Noel Kramer says Pearson’s argument that a “Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign is an unconditional and unlimited warrant of satisfaction has no basis and that when trial Judge Judith Bartnoff rejected that claim, it showed “basic common sense.” Here’s the opinion.

On appeal, the Chungs were represented by Christopher Manning, a partner at Manning Sossamon.

Reached for comment, Pearson told the BLT blog: “I have no comment, and I haven’t seen the opinion.”

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on December 18, 2008 (boomark / email).