This is a long overdue follow-up to my post "A Dirty Shame," in which I introduced the case of a Washington D.C. administrative law judge, Roy Pearson, who sued his dry cleaners for $54 million over allegedly missing pants.
It turns out that way back in June a Washington judge dismissed his case. The BBC story on it doesn't specify on what grounds the case was dismissed, but its corresponding video feature (see link to the right of the story) features a U.S. law expert claiming that Judge Pearson was a "pariah" in legal circles and that his job was seriously under threat.
Those words proved to be true enough, as it was recently discovered that Pearson had not been reappointed as a judge when his term expired in May. (The delay in the report had to do with the AP's request going through the motions of the Freedom of Information Act.) While this may be proper punishment for Pearson's outrageous abuse of the justice system, it's but temporary relief from the kind of self-serving legal logic which allowed Pearson to bring forth his suit in the first place. "Satisfaction Guaranteed," we recall, was the very thing Pearson claimed he didn't receive/experience when his pants were "lost" and then compensated for with a lot of money.