« Previous | Main | Next »
June 25, 2007
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Wooo hoooo! Power to the little people!!!
Posted by: Siouxie | June 25, 2007 at 10:37 AM
"There is justice, Justice."
*goes to collect bookie earnings*
Posted by: kibby F5™ | June 25, 2007 at 10:39 AM
Judge Judy?
Posted by: Spiny Norman | June 25, 2007 at 10:39 AM
Everybody Wang Chung tonight!
Or maybe just they will... either way, well done!
Posted by: WriterDude | June 25, 2007 at 10:42 AM
The sad thing is this merde tete is still a freakin' judge.
Posted by: fivver - Still With More Hair Than Britney Spears | June 25, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Well, if the Judge had kept his tickey...
/window seat on the bus to h3!! please
Off topic to Siouxie...Mom told me there was a painting of a Standard Poodle in the same room as the one where the most modern painting of the Cecil's are. I don't remember that, do you? I also did a GIS and couldn't find it. Reason I'm asking is because a good friend of mine had a Standard named Max (now deceased) that was a direct decendant of the one in the painting and was purchased from one of the Cecils who apparently still breeds them. Anyway, I don't remember the painting, do you?
Sorry for the threadjack, back to your regularly scheduled snarkiness.
Posted by: casey | June 25, 2007 at 10:43 AM
this is kind of interesting (but not funny)
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/sebok/20070619.html
Posted by: judi | June 25, 2007 at 10:44 AM
Wow, Judge Roy really got taken to the cleaners. . . no wait.
Posted by: Lairbo | June 25, 2007 at 10:44 AM
I smell a countersuit . . .
Posted by: ubetcha | June 25, 2007 at 10:45 AM
my mom wore pant suits back in the 70's, but never one that pricey.
Posted by: crossgirl | June 25, 2007 at 10:46 AM
fivver -- nice! I not only pardon your French, I admire it.
Posted by: WriterDude | June 25, 2007 at 10:49 AM
casey - nope...don't remember...course I was so damn HOT I coulda seen a poodle and not noticed LOL I was aiming for the fans.
Posted by: Siouxie | June 25, 2007 at 10:51 AM
judi's interesting, yet not funny link.
Posted by: Siouxie | June 25, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Well Siouxie, what could Biltmore expect? If'n they knew you and I would be there at the same time, I'm sure they would have had more fans blowing.....
Posted by: casey | June 25, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Gratuitous legal technicality: The guy is not a "judge" in the sense that he provides over a court and dispenses justice over a variety cases. He's an "administrative law judge" - a civil service employee, usually with a law degree, who hears cases in a narrow area, like reviewing Social Security decisions.
Posted by: pogo | June 25, 2007 at 11:02 AM
Admist the celebration I have to point out that merely being ordered to pay the defendant's court fees is hardly a fitting penality. The judge should be required to shovle their sidewalk for the next three winters and maybe wash their windows.
or at very least be required to wear a large placard that reads "Ask me why I'm such a hugh prick"
Posted by: orcel | June 25, 2007 at 11:10 AM
Guys, Gals, it is a victory, but it is only bittersweet. Remember these dry cleaners have had their livelihood ruined, and are probably up to their ears in lawyers' fees. Not exactly justice.
Posted by: Edgar Greenberg | June 25, 2007 at 11:11 AM
casey, very true...very true indeed!
orcel, I think he should be ordered to do their laundry (by hand).
Posted by: Siouxie | June 25, 2007 at 11:13 AM
sorry - i sent this article in llike maybe 2 minutes before it got posted..... but RIGHT ON! that 'judge' needs to spend time with judge judy, who would slap him silly.
Posted by: queensbee | June 25, 2007 at 11:14 AM
Marion Barry (any relation?) apparently staged the whole thing to distract from his drunk driving.
Posted by: The blog reader formerly known as Matt | June 25, 2007 at 11:15 AM
You do know who Marion Barry is right?
Posted by: Edgar Greenberg | June 25, 2007 at 11:20 AM
The guy is not a "judge" in the sense that he provides over a court and dispenses justice over a variety cases. He's an "administrative law judge" - a civil service employee, usually with a law degree, who hears cases in a narrow area, like reviewing Social Security decisions.
and yet he still makes everyone call him 'maestro'....
Posted by: insomniac | June 25, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Edgar Greenberg: Correction, the JUDGE is now up to his eyeballs in legal fees as they were awarded to the defendants in his loss. They are essentially free and clear. And everyone nwas on their side in this so I don't see word of mouth ruining their business, only enhancing it at this point since this man is CLEARLY an idiot.
Now, all we need is to have him removed from the bench (or society or the human race. Can we do that?) and all will be complete!
Posted by: KOW | June 25, 2007 at 11:25 AM
*snork* @ insom!
Posted by: Elaine | June 25, 2007 at 11:26 AM
Of course Edgar, that was sarcasm.
Posted by: The blog reader formerly known as Matt | June 25, 2007 at 11:27 AM
What is this Sarcasm thing you speak of?
Posted by: Edgar Greenbergski | June 25, 2007 at 11:40 AM
Unlike everyone else here, I was on the side of the judge. Had he won, I would have been able to sue Burger King for the retinal damage and mental anguish done my that annoying big-headed mascot thingy that is being foisted on the unknowing public.
Or maybe sue Geico for the damage done to my psyche and marriage by those damned Cavemen ads that will now be coming in 30 minute episodes in primetime, and that Baroness vonKlyff no doubt will want to watch.
Posted by: Bãrön vønKlýff | June 25, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Nope KOW, they were NOT awarded attorney's fees, just court costs . . . the attorney's fees issue has been tabled for further motions proceedings . . . including a defense motion for sanctions against the plaintiff.
And even if they are awarded attorney's fees, they still have to collect them which is NEVER an easy task. The judge doesn't just order the loosing party to bring a big wad of cash to court. Few judgments are ever realized at face value. Besides, this guy will likely appeal.
Posted by: Boo Augustus | June 25, 2007 at 12:40 PM
If that lawyer who sued over those pants happens to be a reader of the Dave Barry blog, I'd like to say something to him: Ha.Ha. And also, Loser!
Posted by: Bethie | June 25, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Since I'm sure you're all dying to see what those $54M pants looked like, this article includes a picture. (Judi, you can ignore my email; I'm LTTG as usual.)
Posted by: Richard the Weasel-Hearted | June 25, 2007 at 10:23 PM