legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Merlo v. City of Palo Alto CA6
The underlying dispute that is the subject of this appeal began in 2005 when appellant Anthony Merlo filed the first of three lawsuits against the City of Palo Alto (City). Merlo alleged that City violated election procedures for the approval of an increase in storm drain fees for property owners in Palo Alto.
Since its origin in 2005, this dispute has resulted in Merlo being designated a vexatious litigant pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 391, and having a judgment entered against him for contempt and sanctions in the amount of $45,304.66.
In this appeal, Merlo, proceeding in propria persona, argues that the judgment of contempt and sanctions is void, because the trial court proceedings during which the judgment was entered were automatically stayed pursuant to section 916 by another pending appeal.
We find that the judgment is not void, and affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale