You have no doubt heard by now of the suit brought by an Administrative Law Judge in Washington, D.C., to recover $54 million dollars from a Korean dry cleaner for losing the judge's pants. Not surprisingly, the ALJ who brought this outrage into court has lost the case, and is, thus far, liable for court costs. A motion for attoneys fees running in the many thosusands of dollars has been made by the small businessman, and will be entertained by the court at a future date.
In the meantime, I thought it important that I put to rest any lingering doubts as to whether the fellow who so fouled the system of justice, the court, and his neighbor, is anything other than an abusive bully unworthy of being a lawyer, much less a judge. He isn't.
He has brought such disrpute unpon his office that the D.C. Office of Administrative hearings has taken him off of cases since May, and removed his biography from its website.
Not enough. This person has shown himself to be so vindicative and irrational that he should be barred from practicing the law. He set out to ruin another human being, putting forth such outlandish theories as to bring into serious question, not only his character and fitness to practice the law, but also his sanity. He has made a mockery of himself and my profession. He must go.
Color me pissed.
7 comments:
I suspect he is a racist too. The legal equivalent of an LA rioter attacking a Korean owned small business.
SILENCE!
I paid so little attention to this story when it was first aired that I missed the fact that he is/was an ALJ. Loser.
Yes, it takes all kinds--and most certainly the oportunistic kind--but how is it that the cleaners was initially willing to pay him $12K for the lost trousers?
And what am I doing wrong?
I have a silk blouse and white linen slacks that still haven't been "found" by my dry cleaners, and all I get is "please, please, rady, check your crosets again. Then everything OK"
No wonder I don't sue.
"Color me pissed."
Which probably explains the plethora of typos in your post...ne c'est pas?
I particularly like "vindicative." It's sounds so much nastier than "vindictive," don' cha tink?
Aren't cases like this tailor made for professional organizations like the bar to do a little self-policing?
Every time I see a story like this (and it happens in medicine too, and in every other profession) I wonder where the professional associations are, and what their justification for existence is, if not to call people like this moron to account?
At the very least there ought to be some kind of procedure to censure members who abuse the trust placed in them as members of the bar. But I can already hear the outraged howls that would greet any such attempt to impose accountability to the standards a lot of these folks profess to uphold. When the rubber meets the road...
*sigh*
spd rdr:
I agree; "vindicative" does sound stronger than "vindictive"...
Post a Comment