The question before the court
Jennie Donohue is seeking emergency relief in Santa Clara County Superior Court after Palo Alto police towed the GMC pickup where she had been living on Aug. 31. Her filing names the city, the Police Department and Bill’s Towing, according to Palo Alto Online’s account of court records. The dispute centers on whether she received the notice and review required after the truck was taken, and on who should bear storage charges while that issue is contested.
The pickup is being held at Bill’s Towing in Mountain View and contains Donohue’s belongings, tools and other property. Storage is adding $120 a day, the report said. Donohue alleges that the towing decision may also have been affected by the vehicle’s perceived connection to homelessness or vehicle habitation.
How the hearing dispute arose
Donohue contacted Palo Alto police on Sept. 3 to ask about a hearing after the tow. Five days later, Sgt. Dan Pojanamat told her that the truck’s registration had been expired since August 2017 and that the department does not issue warnings before towing vehicles whose registrations have been expired for more than six months, according to Palo Alto Online. He directed her to renew the registration and submit related paperwork.
Donohue later contended that the response came after the statutory 48-hour period and that she had not been told when the email was sent that it would count as the hearing. Pojanamat’s position was that his email already served that function, the report said. The lawsuit challenges whether that exchange satisfied the required process.
Requested relief and the city’s position
Donohue wrote to the Palo Alto city attorney’s office on Sept. 11 and filed for emergency judicial relief on Sept. 16, according to Palo Alto Online. She asks the court to order release of the truck, protect the vehicle and its contents from destruction, and eliminate storage charges incurred after the disputed 48-hour period.
The report said Donohue would otherwise have to complete the registration and police paperwork, pay a vehicle-release charge, and settle the towing and storage bill before retrieving the pickup. Assistant City Attorney Mark Vanni is expected to represent Palo Alto and oppose her request.
The policy setting
Palo Alto separately restricts overnight parking by RVs and other oversized vehicles in residential neighborhoods and limits parking elsewhere to 72 hours, according to Palo Alto Online’s report on the city’s policy. The City Council also approved a permit pilot intended to provide long-term spaces for about 37 RVs along portions of Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road.
At an Aug. 24 council meeting, City Attorney Chris Jensen said the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson limits the city’s obligation to provide shelter when it displaces an unsheltered resident. Jensen also said vehicle-dweller programs should include support and resources aimed at helping residents move into permanent housing, rather than merely targeting people who live in oversized vehicles.
Related California litigation
The dispute comes as other California cities face challenges involving the treatment of unhoused people and their property. Smart Cities Dive reported that a federal judge certified a Berkeley civil-rights case as a class action; the plaintiffs allege that the city’s encampment procedures and 72-hour parking restrictions violate constitutional protections and discriminate against unhoused people with disabilities. The state counted 181,934 people experiencing homelessness in 2025, the article reported.
In Sebastopol, civil-rights groups challenged an ordinance restricting vehicles used for human habitation, according to case summaries from Disability Rights Advocates and the ACLU Foundation of Northern California. A federal district court dismissed that lawsuit in November 2024, and the plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
