It could be a mental illness, but in a case that extreme, I would think he would find it difficult to function in other areas (people would notice!) and I think this case took awhile to go thru the courts. He would have either gotten a lot worse, or his symptoms would have improved and he would have dropped the case. Definitely not schizophrenia, very few people with that illness are functional enough to be a judge. So it could be a personality disorder, which is a long term, unremitting kind of pattern of behavior (not bipolar, schizophrenia, depression OCD etc) or maybe he is just a domineering jerk who was going to teach those folks a "lesson."
2007-06-26 16:58:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, I heard the guy was an attorney, not a judge and also that the dry cleaners had offered to settle for $12,000 dollars and he turned them down. If I was a judge, and he came before me with that civil suit and admitted that he had turned down the offered settlement, I'd throw the case out as a frivolous law suit that was wasting both tax payer money and judicial resources and I'd bring his ridiculous pursuit before the state bar association for unethical practices. I'm pretty sure in civil cases you still have to prove that A. You are an "injured" party and B. Be able to support you amount of damages claimed. A. is no problem, dry cleaner lost the pants, but part B, it would be hard for anyone with normal intelligence to assign a value to a pair of pants at more than a few hundred dollars...and then I'm talking some pretty nice pants. $60,000,000.00; give the man a drug test!
2007-06-25 12:52:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jim 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
HM pants made of solid gold. (they sunk)! Quick call the Chinese dude and tell him to check the bottom of his machine! lol. Just thought of something it's the judges fault. The label in "my gold pants" says warning do not dry clean. Use tarnish remover only.
2007-06-25 12:47:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Michael N 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
it actually makes sense when you read it--he was suing for the damages to himself and for punitive damages
he's claiming that this is not the first time that this has happened so given the thousands of customers these people have had and how unlikely they are to sue--punitive damages is supposed to make up for all those times that you did something wrong but didn't get caught. so he was looking to recover his own damages and damages on behalf of everyone else who got screwed.
the problem is his calculation, not his theory--he severely overestimates how often that happens. i could see suing for...$10,000
but yeah, he's a little off the charts with that one.
2007-06-25 13:31:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by brian 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Mentally ill, no, but he's certainly a sign of what's really wrong with our legal system, and for damn sure isn't the kind of Judge that's going to help fix it.
2007-06-25 12:51:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by open4one 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
particular, I did learn it. it is absurd. He makes the case that Zondervan replaced a word interior the NT to study "gay". even even with the undeniable fact that the Jewish texts have made homosexuality a sin for hundreds of years. you could sue somebody for appearing in a hateful way in the direction of you, yet you won't have the ability to sue somebody for publishing a non secular text textile that's hundreds of years previous. Edit: in simple terms to be sparkling, he's no longer pointing out that the Bible violates his constitutional rights. he's pointing out that the Bible has led to human beings to discriminate against him. it could appear as if splitting hairs, yet returned, the e book did no longer do something to him. human beings have. human beings could be sued, no longer publishers of books.
2016-10-18 21:19:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by manjeet 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. Very. He sounds psychotic, neurotic, paranoid schizophrenic and basically bonkers. Or he could just be a complete and utter _______ (Insert expletive). He sounds like the sort of judge who would put you on death row for not paying a parking ticket.
2007-06-25 12:44:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Blissey 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, I believe that he is just hate filled and out to make some free greenbacks. That man should be kicked off the bench.
2007-06-25 12:50:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
He was a typical liberal.
I guess he thought the dry cleaner, was an evil neo-con owned corporation.
Does anyone really expect more from a Democratic judge?
2007-06-25 12:43:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by jeeper_peeper321 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
I think that he saw a way to get rich quick & tried it. Luckily, it bit him in the butt! They are currently talking about bringing him up on ethics charges. I hope they stick it to him!
2007-06-25 12:43:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Julia B 6
·
0⤊
0⤋