A former Florida judge sued a small dry cleaners for 54 million dollars over a pair of pants. HA HA HA HA!
Two years ago, the financially struggling judge took a suit in to be cleaned. He claimed the cleaners lost his pants. The cleaners gave him a check for $200 for the pants, which the man cashed.
I would assume that is what is referred to as "settling". But no, it's gets better.
The judge sued the cleaners for an accumulated cost of 2 years of fees (it confuses me too) for the pants. His original amount was for $64 million, but later dropped the amount to $54 million.
The cleaners offer to settle 3 times, all for 5 digit amounts and the former judge refused.
The judge of this case ruled on behalf of the defendants stating that there's no such thing as a pair of slacks worth $54 million. He said that the prosecution had taken the term "Satisfaction Guaranteed" to an extreme measure and made unreasonable demands that could not be met.
The man was ordered to pay for court costs; the defense is allowed to in turn to sue the former judge for their attorney's fees, if they so choose.
Well, I say good for everyone! Congrats, I mean it. In a country where we have nothing better to do than sue each other for ridiculous reasons, I say Amen!
How many times do hear about some utterly stupid case and the prosecution wins? Too often, in my opinion. Other judges ought to have a look-see at this case and learn a good lesson.
Two years ago, the financially struggling judge took a suit in to be cleaned. He claimed the cleaners lost his pants. The cleaners gave him a check for $200 for the pants, which the man cashed.
I would assume that is what is referred to as "settling". But no, it's gets better.
The judge sued the cleaners for an accumulated cost of 2 years of fees (it confuses me too) for the pants. His original amount was for $64 million, but later dropped the amount to $54 million.
The cleaners offer to settle 3 times, all for 5 digit amounts and the former judge refused.
The judge of this case ruled on behalf of the defendants stating that there's no such thing as a pair of slacks worth $54 million. He said that the prosecution had taken the term "Satisfaction Guaranteed" to an extreme measure and made unreasonable demands that could not be met.
The man was ordered to pay for court costs; the defense is allowed to in turn to sue the former judge for their attorney's fees, if they so choose.
Well, I say good for everyone! Congrats, I mean it. In a country where we have nothing better to do than sue each other for ridiculous reasons, I say Amen!
How many times do hear about some utterly stupid case and the prosecution wins? Too often, in my opinion. Other judges ought to have a look-see at this case and learn a good lesson.
No comments:
Post a Comment