Editing Frivolous litigation (section)

===''Pearson v. Chung''===
In 2005, in ''[[Pearson v. Chung]]'', Roy Pearson, a [[Washington, D.C.]] judge, sued a [[dry cleaning]] business for $67 million for allegedly losing a pair of his pants. This case has been cited as an example of frivolous litigation.<ref>
{{cite news |title=The Great American Pants Suit |url=http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010225 |quote=It's nice to see that even the organized plaintiffs bar piously deplores Mr. Pearson's abuse of the law. It would be even nicer if they agreed to stop opposing reforms that would give the Chungs of the world a fighting chance the next time around. |work=Wall Street Journal |date=June 18, 2007 |access-date=2007-06-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070620154859/http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010225 |archive-date=2007-06-20 |url-status=live }}
</ref> According to Pearson, the dry cleaners lost his pants (which he brought in for a $10.50 alteration) and refused his demands for a large refund. Pearson believed that a sign saying "Satisfaction Guaranteed" in the window of the shop legally entitled him to a refund for the cost of the pants, estimated at $1,000. The $54 million total also included $2.0 million in "mental distress" and $15,000 which he estimated to be the cost of renting a car every weekend to go to another dry cleaners.<ref>
{{cite news |first=Marc |last=Fisher |title=Wearing Down the Judicial System With a Pair of Pants |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061302033.html |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |location=[[Washington, D.C.]] |issn=0190-8286 |page=B01 |date=14 June 2007 |access-date=2008-09-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110216153534/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061302033.html |archive-date=2011-02-16 |url-status=live }}
</ref> The court ultimately ruled against Pearson, whose judgeship was subsequently not renewed due to this case and several other actions he filed during his divorce, which were found to demonstrate a lack of "judicial temperament".<ref>
{{cite news |title=Judge Set to Lose Job, Sources Say |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/22/AR2007102202170.html?hpid=moreheadlines |newspaper=[[Washington Post]] |date=October 23, 2007 |first=Keith L. |last=Alexander |access-date=June 30, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160531020105/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/22/AR2007102202170.html?hpid=moreheadlines |archive-date=2016-05-31 |url-status=live }}
</ref>