Fancy Pants: $54 Million

Well, he’s dropped his pants but the very real lawsuit abuse continues… and it all kicks off on Monday - or so it was supposed to... it appears the trial has been moved to Tuesday/
DC Judge Roy L. Pearson Jr. who originally brought his outrageous $67 million lawsuit against a Korean family-owned dry cleaners has dropped his claim to $54 million and trial starts at 9:15a on Tuesday morning – and I will be there at the DC Superior Court.

According to Pearson, he has decided to drop the actual loss of the pants themselves (the Chung family was prepared to present a pair of pants that they believe are the actual lost pair) and focus on the “false advertising” aspect of the case – which is apparently worth $54 million.
So now, we at least know that the Judge valued his pants at $13 million!

Under the DC Consumer Protection Act, Judge Pearson believes the Chungs committed fraud and falsely advertised their services based on two signs that were in the shop at the time of the original transaction: “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and “Same Day Service.”

I spoke yesterday with Chung family attorney Chris Manning who told me that he felt Judge Pearson seems to be determined in harassing his clients who have suffered legal costs in the “upper tens of thousands of dollars.”

As a sidebar to this case, Judge Pearson (who is on administrative leave) is being considered for re-appointment to a 10-year term as an administrative hearing judge. No word on that from the tight-lipped court officials. And my calls and emails to Pearson have not been returned.

So get ready for the circus coming to DC – to which I have procured an outrageous pair of pants to wear at the trial myself as a social commentary on the frivolous nature of the case.

But it’s important to remember that there is a serious side to this case as well – the Chungs moved here in pursuit of the American dream many years ago and opened up a successful dry cleaners only to see their small fortunes evaporate at the hands of a vindictive legal official.
If you interested in helping – there is a website set up to help the Chungs offset legal costs with donations from the public. (www.customcleanersdefensefund.com)

I can be reached for questions or comments at Griffsnotes@foxnews.com.

DC City Council: Over 75? Re-Take Driving Tests!

This morning I read the news that the DC City Council was scheduled to vote on a measure that decides whether or not the DMV will continue enforcing a law that requires elderly drivers (75 and up) to pass written and field tests to maintain their driver’s licenses. Apparently, sometime last year the DMV began this enforcement that lead to an outcry of complaints from the District’s seniors and the AARP and ultimately resulted in the Mayor’s suspending of the tests.

Upon reading the news, I was taken back to a scene of one of the great Clint Eastwood movies from my childhood Every Which Way But Loose. (It was actually the sequel Every Which Way You Can.) In the scene, Eastwood’s cantankerous mother “Ma Boggs” (played by Ruth Gordon) is being driven to the DMV to retake her driver’s test (she never seems to pass it) by her other son, Orville in his towing truck. Here’s how the conversation went:

Ma: I shoulda remembered my wig! Think it’ll make any difference?
Orville: I don’t know, ma? I don’t expect that’s all they’re gonna be looking at… I sure hope you pass it this time, Ma. There ain’t too many more of these places you can go – they all know you!

Ma: Don’t know how I drive – Don’t none of them know how GOOD I drive… Been driving since before them sons of ******* were born!!

The scene perfectly captures the essence of the emotional part of this debate: losing one’s independence. And I can only imagine that as liberating of a moment it was in your life when you finally reached the driving age, the opposite is true of the day when it is taken away.

But arguably, there is a serious and legitimate public safety concern. According to data from AAA’s Foundation for Traffic Safety, drivers between the ages of 75-84, the rate of deaths were about 3 per 100 million miles driven – a figure pretty much equal to that of teenage drivers. But for drivers 85 and older, the fatality rate is nearly four times the teenagers. Figures for 2005 show that 11% of fatal crashes involved drivers in the 85+ group, but with the baby boomers there is a prediction that we can expect an increase to almost 25% by 2030.

According to a USA Today article, “twenty-three states require drivers of a certain age to appear periodically at a department of motor vehicles office to renew their license.” And after researching the topic, it would appear that most seniors actually choose to stop driving on their own generally speaking.

And at the risk of upsetting our wisest members of society, the Washington Post wrote in an editorial today in reference to the District’s case, “It may not be what they want, but the best interests of seniors as well as everyone else lie in the council not doing their bidding and leaving a good policy alone.”

I spoke with AARP’s Spokeswoman Eleanor Ginzler who told me that on a national level, the AARP would like to see “all states identify effective methods to address at-risk drivers at the time of renewal.” The AARP also offers information and details about their “Driver Safety Program” that one can find on their website at www.aarp.org.

Both of my parents are in their seventies and are good drivers. In fact, my dad has 20-10 vision and I wear glasses – so what does that tell you?! But I think just about all of us have encountered the proverbial “little ol’ lady” driving with little recognition of the rest of us on the road.

I support – at the risk of being admonished by my elders – the idea of screening for at-risk drivers at the time of renewal. And I am reminded of some advice given to me by a fine law enforcement officer at my very first speeding ticket some twenty years ago: Driving is a privilege, not a right.

And to steal the old drinking and driving saying, “know when to say when.”

I can be reached for questions, comments and verbal abuse at Griffsnotes@foxnews.com.

Rep. William Jefferson Charged with Cold Hard Cash & More

A federal grand jury returned a 94-page indictment on 16 counts against Rep. William Jefferson, D-La. You may recall raids last year – which were challenged by Jefferson – on his Capitol office and Washington, DC home where $90,000 cash was discovered in his freezer. The charges today include:

Solicitation of bribes, racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, obstruction of justice, violations of the foreign corrupt practices act and conspiracy.

If convicted on all counts, Bribing Bill Jefferson could be looking at 235 years in the slammer.
At a press conference today at the Justice Dept, as many as “11 different bribe schemes” were used to “enrich himself and other family members.” Jefferson’s primary scheme involved his securing business deals in Nigeria and Ghana.

Already, two Jefferson associates – a telecom executive Vernon Jackson and Jefferson aide Brett Pfeffer – have plead guilty in participating in the bribery schemes.
“This case is about greed, power and arrogance and everyone is entitled to ethical behavior,” said FBI’s Washington Field Office Asst Dir Joe Persichini.

That’s a very interesting statement considering that the congressman was once on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee. And more than that, he was easily re-elected (57%) to a 9th term last year despite the raids and an ongoing bribery investigation.

New Orleans bemoans its reputation as a “corrupt” city. But when they re-elect shining pillars of integrity who stash $90,000 of an FBI Informant’s cash in their freezer next to the Ben and Jerry’s, they end up getting what they ask for: corrupt officials.

This is pure speculation on my part, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see Mayor Ray Nagin come to Jefferson’s defense before the trial concludes. After all, Nagin and Jefferson supported each other’s successful re-election bids last year. But I will be shocked – although not necessarily surprised – if Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton comes to Jefferson’s aid too.

But this is nothing new to Washington. Another case of Potomac Fever infects another weak civil servant who sought to make a mockery of our government…

What really gets me is this: whether it’s Jim Trafficant or Duke Cunningham or even Mark Foley, when are we going to learn to quit sending these guys to work in Washington?

In fairness to Jefferson, he has been indicted – not convicted. That may or may not come in the not too distant future. Either way – the guy doesn’t deserve to remain in office.

House Minority Leader John Boehner is already leading the charge to force a House vote to expel Jefferson while Speaker Nancy Pelosi rides the fence in this statement:

"The charges in the indictment against Congressman Jefferson are extremely serious. While Mr. Jefferson, just as any other citizen, must be considered innocent until proven guilty, if these charges are proven true, they constitute an egregious and unacceptable abuse of public trust and power. "As we have demonstrated in implementing tough ethics reforms and passing tough lobbying reforms already this year, Democrats are committed to upholding a high ethical standardand eliminating corruption and unethical behavior from the Congress.”

I hope they do the right thing. Jefferson himself could do us all a favor too – and resign for the preservation of the House’s integrity.

I can be reached for questions or comments at Griffsnotes@foxnews.com.