Editor’s Note: This decision contains discussion of citation references that are incorrect or do not actually exist. These invalid citations appeared in the original court opinion and have been preserved as written since they are part of the official record. Any links to these invalid citations have been removed.
Motorist was cited for failure to display license plates in violation of city ordinance. The District Court entered judgment finding motorist “guilty” of violating ordinance and designated him a vexatious litigant. Defendant appealed designation, and city sought sanctions for fictitious cases in motorist’s appellate brief.
The Supreme Court held that:
- Verdict form and judgment should have stated motorist had been adjudicated in violation of ordinance, not that he was “guilty” of violating it;
- Trial court had jurisdiction to designate motorist a vexatious litigant;
- Trial court acted within its discretion in designating motorist a “vexatious litigant”;
- Trial court did not violate motorist’s constitutional rights by designating him a vexatious litigant; and
- Supreme Court would award city $500.00 as a sanction for motorist’s citation to nonexistent cases.