Taking the Dry Cleaner to the Cleaners

A judge (of administrative law?) in Washington DC is suing his dry cleaner for $54 million (you read that right) for losing a pair of pants. Whilethe dry cleaner says he found the pants, the judge is saying that they are the wrong pants. The judge claims that a sign stating satisfaction guaranteed is unconditional and the lost pants, costs and damages are actually worth $67 million but he magnanimously is willing to accept the lower amount.

In a poor sign for the plaintiff, the trial judge is mocking his case and chiding the administrative law judge for poor knowledge of the relevant law. (Isn't the saying something like a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client). Although he is representing himself he is claiming millions of dollars in legal fees. He is also claiming $15,000 to rent a car to go to a different dry cleaner - did he rent a Hummer and drive to LA for another dry cleaner?

The defendant is saying that he should perhaps be liable for the pants (although he says they are the right ones) and that the case is frivilous. He says the judge went through a costly divorce (caught with his pants down perhaps - :-) ) and is looking for easy money.

Here's hoping he gets kicked in the ass and sent home.