Associated Press and the Washington Post, among others, have reported on a lawsuit for $65 million over a lost pair of pants.Â The plaintiff (Roy Pearson – a District of Columbia Adminsitrative Hearings Judge), aggrieved over a lost pair of pants, apparently believes that the District of Columbia’s consumer fraud statute applies because the plaintiff’s cleaners posted signs in their store reading “Same Day Service” and “Satisfaction Guaranteed.”Â The plaintiff contends that the $1500/day fine for violating the statute adds up to the $65 million.
Obviously, I don’t know more about this case than what the press reports.Â But how has it survived summary judgment, at least on the consumer fraud claim?
Summary judgment? Some of the plaintiff’s theories sound as though they shouldn’t have made it past a motion to dismiss.
Here’s an even funnier take from the Washington Post http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2007/05/dc_judge_wants_65_million_for.html