Anyways, the Chungs are in their 60s and they don’t need the stress and drama anymore. Hopefully the sale of their two shops and continued revenue from their third can provide them a decent living post-retirement.

When Pearson started gathering material in his quest to squeeze a struggling Korean immigrant family for megamillions in 2005, he posted fliers on light poles in the neighborhood, asking residents to feed him horror stories about the company. Business, which had been strong, declined significantly and never rebounded, said Choi and the Chungs’ attorney, Christopher Manning.

“You’d think the trial and all the publicity would have a good effect on business,” Manning said, “but for a dry cleaner, it really doesn’t, because your customers are from the immediate neighborhood.”

Great comment! A lesson in how a simple ommission can drastically change a point of view.

On July 24, 2007, The American Tort Reform Association and the Institute for Legal Reform of the United States Chamber of Commerce hosted a fundraiser for the Chungs to help pay their attorneys fees that reported having raised up to $64,000.00. [26] The Chungs say they have received close to $100,000 from supporters to cover their attorneys’ fees and lost business.[18]

“…Citing a loss of revenue and emotional strain from the lawsuit, the Chungs announced, on September 19, 2007, that they have closed and sold the dry cleaning shop involved in the dispute. The Chungs still own one additional dry cleaning shop and have stated they will be focusing their attention and resources on their remaining shop.[27]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson_v._Chung

Being that cm is, I seen to recall, a Canadian gyopo, I think he’s being sarcastic.

And, as usual, being far too heavyhanded with it for it to be effective.

Plus Rob, being a lawyer himself, Pearson can cover his own legal fees, whereas anyone NOT a lawyer trying to sue Pearson would have to pay someone $400 an hour.