The appeal in the $54 million missing pants lawsuit was heard today.

The three-judge appeals panel peppered former judge Roy Pearson with questions about whether he was aware of other rulings in which a promise of “Satisfaction Guaranteed” meant that unsatisfied customers should be entitled to whatever damages they believe were appropriate.

“You’ve got to help us figure out what it means,” Judge Phyllis Thompson said. “You haven’t pointed me to a case which reaches a conclusion you would have us reach.”

Pearson did not provide any examples, but maintained that his lawsuit had merit under the city’s Consumer Protection Act.

Stay tuned.