This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.


City of Lake Forest v. Evergreen Holistic Collective

City may not prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries altogether, with caveat that Legislature authorized dispensaries at sites where marijuana is collectively cultivated.



Cite as

2012 DJDAR 4213

Published

Mar. 29, 2012

Filing Date

Mar. 28, 2012


_

CITY OF LAKE FOREST,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

EVERGREEN HOLISTIC COLLECTIVE,

Defendant and Appellant.

 

No. G043909

(Super. Ct. No. 30-2009-00298887)

California Courts of appeal

Fourth Appellate District

Division Three

Filed March 29, 2012

 

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION;

NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT

 

           It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on  February 29, 2012, be modified as follows:

 

1.        On page 23, the last sentence of the first partial paragraph, the word ?and? is changed to ?or? so the sentence reads:

 

        ?Accordingly, we conclude a dispensary may be located at the site where its members collectively or cooperatively cultivate their marijuana.?

 

           2.  On page 29, change ?voter?s? to ?voters?? in the second sentence of footnote 7.

 

           3.  On page 38, second sentence of subpart 8., delete the word ?now? so that the sentence reads:

 

        ?Section 11362.768 provides that in zoning districts where a local government requires a local business license, no medical marijuana project with a storefront or mobile retail outlet may be located within 600 feet of a school.?

 

           4.  On page 39, first sentence of the first full paragraph, delete the words and comma ?As amended,? so that the sentence reads:

        ?Section 11362.768 also provides:  ?Nothing in this section shall prohibit . . . .??

 

           5.  On page 39, second sentence of the first full paragraph, the words ?The amendment? are changed to ?Section 11362.768? so that the sentence reads:

       

?Section 11362.768 further provides:  ?Nothing in this section shall preempt . . . .??

 

           These modifications do not change the judgment. 

 

ARONSON, J.

 

WE CONCUR:

     RYLAARSDAM, ACTING P. J.

     FYBEL, J.

 

 

#264683

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390