Comments on: There is Justice After All: $54 Million Pants Lawsuit Thrown Out.

By: ted

ted — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 03:44:33 +0000

Judges are people, too. He’s probably seen enough frivolous cases during his time on the bench that he figured he may as well do the same thing. Perhaps he was proving a point. He probably wanted to see how well he could do.

It is a free country…

By: tea drinker

tea drinker — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 03:39:46 +0000

the description of him actually in tears while testifying certainly leads me to agree that he is mentally ill. Making it all the more horrifying that he’s a judge.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 23:09:00 +0000

It would be interesting to look at this man’s record while on the bench …. I wonder if he ever made any really bad judgments due to his mental illness. (And yes, I’m sorry - but all evidence points that this man has some kind of psychological problem in which he felt losing his favorite pair of pants actually justified $54m.)

By: Nicholas Dollak

Nicholas Dollak — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:51:13 +0000

Thank goodness! But seriously, that case should never have gone as far as it did. We need to take the approach of the Japanese legal system, which has made lawsuits so difficult to file that only very serious cases ever make it to this point.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 11:59:38 +0000

I was disappointed that they were just ordinary pants. I was hoping for a pair of really ugly zubaz.

By: SearchEngines WEB

SearchEngines WEB — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 04:18:46 +0000

Their legal fees are in the tens of thousands - there is also something wrong with U.S.Lawyers fees when a case that gets thrown out can cost so much, imagine if it had gone to trial how much more it would have cost?

By: The Slapster

The Slapster — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 02:21:34 +0000

The fact that this a-hole made over $100,000 a year and forced a hard-working family into pissing away their life savings for a frivolous lawsuit? Where do I write to make sure he’s not only fired, but never sits on a bench again?

By: v.dog

v.dog — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 01:45:21 +0000

@elizabeth: At the most, the dry cleaner should pay for a new pair of pants. That’s what, about $50? Suing for $54000000 is just greedy, and about as bad as the RIAA wanting $10000 dollars per song, while claiming ‘irreparable damage’.

By: Chad

Chad — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 00:42:44 +0000

well elizabeth, I’M satisfied!

By: Adam Stanhope

Adam Stanhope — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:01:30 +0000

All I wanted was for *somebody* associated with the case to say whether or not the plaintiff was mentally ill. I would imagine that he was and that everyone involved was too polite to say so. It is my understanding that he broke into tears during his opening statement when he touched upon the emotional impact of having lost his pants.

By: elizabeth

elizabeth — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 21:44:00 +0000

So what about the “Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign? Is it pointless?

By: meg

meg — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 21:04:11 +0000

The judge made the man who sued them pay their legal bills as well as a fine to them for all the distress he caused. They didn’t even have to counter-sue.

By: artbot

artbot — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 20:46:09 +0000

Please! Won’t someone think of the pants!!!

By: Bryan

Bryan — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:07:13 +0000

Hope the drycleaner is counter-sueing