Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Pearson v. Chung, also known as the "$54 million pants" case, is a 2007 civil case decided in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in which Roy Pearson, then an administrative law judge, sued his local dry cleaning establishment for $54 million in damages after the dry cleaners allegedly lost his pants.
The chemist Sylvia Stoesser (1901–1991) had suggested tetrachloroethylene to be used in dry cleaning as an alternative to highly flammable dry cleaning solvents such as naphtha. [ 14 ] It is also used to degrease metal parts in the automotive and other metalworking industries, usually as a mixture with other chlorocarbons.
Dry cleaning is any cleaning process for clothing and textiles using a solvent other than water. Clothes are instead soaked in a water-free liquid solvent (usually non-polar , as opposed to water which is a polar solvent ).
The Supreme Court stepped in to prevent damage from hazardous waste in order to protect the right to life. A 1995 petition by the Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Natural Resource Policy [ 25 ] spurred the Supreme Court to create the High Powered Committee (HPC) of Hazardous Waste, since data from pre-existing government boards ...
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
A freight claim or cargo claim is a legal demand by a shipper or consignee against a carrier in respect of damage to a shipment, or loss thereof. [1] [2] [3]Typically, the claimant will seek damages (financial compensation for loss), but other remedies include "specific performance", where the cargo-owner seeks delivery of the goods as agreed.
Chung, Roy Pearson, a Washington, D.C. judge, sued a dry cleaning business for $67 million for allegedly losing a pair of his pants. This case has been cited as an example of frivolous litigation. [13] According to Pearson, the dry cleaners lost his pants (which he brought in for a $10.50 alteration) and refused his demands for a large refund.
This act allows cash poor parties financial assistance, settling for smaller payment amounts, and alternative payment methods. This act also allows parties with property adjacent to the brownfields—which may contain hazardous wastes that infect their real estate—relief from the stipulations they would previously been accountable for.