Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Consumer Law Blogs -> Indiana Consumer Lawyer Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Consumer Law
: Indiana Consumer Lawyer BlogDon't Blame Consumer Protection Laws
By Robert Duff, Esq.
Roy L. Pearson, Jr., an administrative hearings judge in the District of Columbia, took several suits to Custom Cleaners in Washington, D.C. for alteration. One of the pairs of pants was missing when he returned to pick them up two days later. So Pearson asked the cleaners to pay for the suit, around $1,000. A week later, though, the cleaners found the pants and refused to pay. Pearson decided to sue.
So of course Pearson sued for everything to which he felt entitled, which turned out to be $65,000,000. Yep, sixty five million dollars.
Pearson is apparently claiming that the cleaner's signs stating "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service" are fraudulent. The bulk of the sixty five million is for 43,200 separate violations of D.C.'s consumer protection law, the Consumer Protection and Procedures Act, which is D.C.'s equivalent of the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act, at $1,500 a pop. Alrighty then. Part of the remainder is money for Pearson to rent a car every weekend for the next ten years so that Pearson can take his clothes to another dry cleaner.
You might have guessed that Pearson is his own lawyer. I'm surprised that even Pearson himself took on a client that dumb.
Pearson has turned down settlement offers of $3,000, $4,600 and $12,000. Meanwhile, the Chungs, South Korean immigrants who opened the cleaners seven years ago, have spent thousands of dollars in attorney fees defending themselves over the past two years.
I just want to go on record as stating that this lawsuit is absurd. But it's important to remember that this abomination of the legal system is in no way typical. This case is already being used by business interest groups to lobby the public against consumer protection statutes across the U.S., decrying "the litigation industry's growing abuse of consumer protection laws." The use of this outrageously extreme case in that way is just as abusive to truth and justice as Mr. Pearson's lawsuit.
I see everyday how much Indiana consumers, and consumer across the country, need laws like these that provide a remedy and access to the courts that they otherwise would not have. I hate to see these much-needed rights come under attack.
Full post as published by Indiana Consumer Lawyer Blog on May 03, 2007 (boomark / email).
Truth In Lending Act
Consumer Loans and Consumer Credit Protection Act
Dumb New York Laws
Stupid Laws in the Empire State
Dumb Texas Laws
Stupid Laws in the Lone Star State
Dumb California Laws
Stupid Laws in the Sunshine State
Dumb Foreign Laws
Stupid Laws of Other Countries
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
ValueClick
allegedly violated consumer protection laws by promising ‘free’ goods that where not actually free.
School Misrepresentation
Lehigh Valley College agrees to pay $200,000 settlement for violating consumer protection laws.
Germantown Primary Care Associates, P.C.
Unlawfully collected fees refunded in Consumer Protection Act violation suit.
Hutchinson Oil
Over $75,000 settlement reached in consumer protection lawsuit.
Internet/Technology
involving cyber law, consumer protection, internet crime, internet fraud, online gambling, e-commerce.
California Labor Laws
alleged violations of California labor laws such as overtime pay, discrimination and harassment.

Consumer Protection Laws and Your Business
Use caution when shopping online auction sites
Antitrust, Deceptive Conduct Under Consumer Protection Statutes and Indirect Purchasers
National Consumer Protection Week
National Consumer Protection Week, March 2-8, 2008








