Roy Pearson, the judge who aroused the ridicule of most of the nation for suing a drycleaning firm for $54 million because they'd ostensibly lost a $100 pair of pants (he only makes $100,000 a year, please remember) has lost his job, as reported in the Washington Post.
They give many reasons, and based on those reasons one wonders why he didn't lose his job a long time ago.
But, to go back to the crux of this entry, which is that Pearson's suit cost the dry-cleaners a heckuva lot of money, so much so that they had to close one store and needed donations to pay their legal bills.
And my question is.... why did the legal system allow this suit to begin with? A business loses a $100 pair of pants, they give you $100, and it's done. If they refuse to pay, you take them to small claims court. How did this suit go as long and far as it did, and cost as much money as it did - money given to lawyers who charge probably $300 an hour if not more, for a measly $100 pair of pants?
It's because the US judicial system allowed it.
That is what is most ridiculous about that whole case.
Frivolous lawsuits are the bane of the judiciary system, yet lawyers make their living off them.
Sad, and of course, scary.