Pants Judge May Lose Job

Administrative Law Judge Roy L. Pearson Jr., the fellow who sued the D.C. dry cleaners for $54 million dollars for losing his pants, is in jeopardy of losing his job.

Judge Pearson was appointed as a District Administrative Law Judge in 2005 for an initial two year term. The city commission (Commission on Selection and Tenure of Administrative Law Judges) that reviews the sitting judges for reappointment for an additional ten year term has notified Judge Pearson he may not be reappointed. Pearson has the opportunity to file a rebuttal and then appear before the commission at the next meeting in September.

If he hasn't already started, the D.C. judge who sued his dry cleaners for $54 million -- and lost -- may want to begin looking for a new job.

The city commission that has been weighing the professional fate of Administrative Law Judge Roy L. Pearson Jr. has voted to formally notify Pearson that he may not be reappointed to the bench, according to a government source. [...]

Apparently, the judge's suing his dry cleaner is not his only transgression. His work as an administrative law judge had been questioned even before his much publicized trial this spring.

If and when Pearson appears before the commission's three voting members, he will likely face questions about far more than the lawsuit that made him the butt of jokes around the world and the target of the tort reform movement here at home. Concerns about his work as an administrative law judge preceded the publicity this spring about his lawsuit and the letter from the commission focuses on those concerns, only addressing the lawsuit briefly. [...]
Since winning at trial, the Chung's (the dry cleaner owners) have filed a petition with the court to recoup attorney costs from Pearson. Pearson has been granted an extension to respond to the Chung's motion.

Sounds to me like Judge Pearson is more combative than he is judicious. An order from the court for him to pay the Chung's attorney fees and the loss of his cherished administrative judgeship would be justice served in this case.