On April 04, 2019 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
City Of Agoura Hills,
City Of Angels Camp,
City Of Arcadia,
City Of Atwater,
City Of Beverly Hills,
City Of Ceres,
City Of Clovis,
City Of Covina,
City Of Dixon,
City Of Downey,
City Of Mcfarland,
City Of Newman,
City Of Oakdale,
City Of Palmdale,
City Of Patterson,
City Of Riverbank,
City Of Riverside,
City Of San Pablo,
City Of Sonora,
City Of Tehachapi,
City Of Temecula,
City Of Tracy,
City Of Turlock,
City Of Vacaville,
County Of Santa Cruz,
and
Ajax, Lori,
Bureau Of Cannibas Control,
for 39 Unlimited - Other Judicial Review
in the District Court of Fresno County.
Preview
III
XAVJER BECER-RA
Attorney Gene1al of California
HARINDER K. KAPUR
FflLEED
t~>..
Senior Assistant Attorney Genera}
State Bar Number: 19876-9
STACEY L. ROBERTS
Superv'ising Deputy Aftorne-y General
State. Bar Number: 23.7998
i600 West Broadway, Suite 1800
San Diego, CA 92101
P.0 Box 85266.
San Diego, CA 92186-5266 RECEIVED
Telephone: (.6l9) 738- 940.7 AM
12/19/2019 11' 19
‘
Fax. (6.] 9)645-2061 FRESNOBCOUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
B:Ay Ramos Deputy
E—mail. Harinder. Kapur@,doj .c'a. gov
Aflmmneys'fo'r Bureau o'fC annabz's, Comm]
.and Lari Ajax, Chiefof the' Bure'au 'of-C‘ann'abi-s Exemptfi‘omflmg fees
C'onIr01 pzilsz'lqnl t0G01! Code 5561 03
10
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATEDF CALIFORNIA
Ijl
COUNTY OF FRESNO
'12.
13
1:4
3
5'
‘1. COUNTY 0F SANTA CRUZ, ET AL, CaseNo. 190130601224
1'6-
Plainti'fl‘s, JOINT PETITION AND
ORDER RE: EXEMPTION FROM
[FWD]
17 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION, MANDATORY
:18 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE, AND
BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL; TRIAL READINESS CONFERENCE
'19 LORI. AJAX in her official gcapacity as
Chief of' the Bureau 0f Cannabis Control;
20 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Dept: 5102
The- Honorable A_IanM
‘
Judge: Simpson
2.1 Defendants. TrialDa'te: Aptilzo, 2020
Action Filed: April4 2019
22
23 Plaintiffs Céuntny-Santa Cruz, et a],(Plaintiffs) filed a complaint: for decglaratory relief
2.4 against Defe'njdanfi. 'Bufeau'of'Cannabis Control and Lqr-i Aj a-x, her official capacity as the;
:in.
25. Chief ofthe Bureau of'Cannabis Control, (Defendants) alleging 't'hat the Cal-ifornia..Code of
26 Regulations, titie16, section 54:16,. subdivision (d) (Cannabis DéliVery Regulation) i's
invalid
Because it isinconsistentwifh Proposition 64 and the M'edi‘r;in'aland Adiflt—Use; Cannabis.
23‘ Regulation ”and Safety Act (California B'u’s'in'esS a‘n'd
Ptofe'ss'ibns Code section 26000; seq.)
et.
l
Joint Petition and [Proposed] Older Re.Exemption fiomAltemati've Dispute. Resolution, Mandatory Settlement-
Conference, and Trial Readiness Conference (l 9CEGG01224
4)
’— Because this-case involves purely aquestion 0f law (i.e.,the validity of’theCann’abis Delivery
N Regulation),- Plaintiffs- and Defendants seek an order from the Court exempting-the parties from
U3
the following Court requirements and dates:
-§ 1. Alternative Dispute Resolution requirement pursuant to Local Rule, Rule 2.4.1 and
*UI
Civil Standing Order No. 07-0628;
O\
2. Hearing on Order to Show Cause re: Alternative Dispute Resolution Stipulation 0n
Q January 21? 2020 at3:30p.m.;
00
_3.¢ Mandatory Settlement Conference on April 2, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.; and,
\O 4‘ 'Tri'alReadiness Conference on April 17, 2020 at 9:30-Vay.m;
The parties are seeking exemption from/these requirements and Court dates pursuant to
Local Rule 2.5.1 and 2.6.2 on the grounds that this case involves strictly a legal question
regarding Whether the Cannabis Delivery Regulation 'is consistent with Proposition64 and the
Medicinal and Adult-Use’Cannabi's Regulation and Safety Act, the parties concurrently filed a
proposed trialbriefing Schedule, and itwould be extremefy unlikely that alternative dispute
resolution and a settlement conference Will resolve this dispute over the interpretation of
Cannabis Delivery Regulation.
IT IS SO STIPUL‘ATED.
Dated: December [2,2019 Respectfully Submitted,
'
XAVIER' BECERRA
OO\)O\UIALRN~O©OONO\M&WN~‘O
Attemey General of Céli'fomiar
HARINDER K. KAPUR >
'
<
y Senior Assistant Attorney General
amg
fl‘
flb/Ldj”
1A EY L. ROB
S pervisingD‘eputy Attorney General
Attorneysfor Defendant’s, Bureau of
Cannabis Control and Lori Ajax, Chiefo
the Bureau quannabis Control
’7
...
Joint Petition and [Proposed] Order Re: Exemption fi'om..Altemative Dispute Resolution,
Mandatory Settlement
Conference, and Trial Readiness Conference (I9CEC601224)
u Dated: December}; 2019 ,
Respectfimy. Submitted,
CHURCHWELL WHITE LLP
‘,
VENGg-CHURCHWELL
Attorneysfor Plaintzfl's
emumma~wp
'3
and [Proposed] Order Re: Exemption
Jo'im-Petitio‘n fi’o'mAltemativeDiSpute Rosa'lutiom Mandatory Sefilement
Conferedcg, and Trial Readifiess Conference (19CECGOI224)
ORDER
[\J
Good. cause appearingthereibr; the Court hereby Orders that:
1.. Theparti'es are'eixe-mp't from th‘e—A'lt‘emat‘iv’e
Dispute Resolution requirement set fofih
Under Local Rule, Rule 2.4.1'
and Ci-‘vil;Stahdirig Order No. 07-0628;
f2, The Hearing ,on- Order-io..Show Cause re: Alternative Dispute ResolutiQnSIipuIation
on January '21-; 2020 at 3:30 p.m._ is vacated;-
sb-ocfii'dx-Lntpw
3. The parties a're ‘e-‘Xe'mpt the
f1"o_1'_n Mandatory Settlement Céuf'erence' under- ngal Rule,
Rule 25. 1;
4.. The. Mandatony' Settlement Conference ‘on April 2, 2020. at I'OEOO _a.-I'n. is vacated;
10 4. The parties are exempt frOm Readiness COhference under 2.6.2; and
the- Tria‘].
11.
6.. The'Trial Readingss COnferende‘ on April 17, 20,20 at 9:330 am. isvacated
\
12
LT IS SO ORDERED;
1:3
.14 DATED: /// 5/“ WCM‘W
JUDGE QFTHE/SUPERIOR COURT
'
15
1-6:
:12
1.8
'
'19
20
2.1
2'2
2'13
,
24
2'5
/'
26
:27
28'
4
O'fd'e‘r‘
Petition
Jbfiirit and [Pr?opos'ed] Ré: Exemption: frbm Alte'mativesDispu‘l‘el Refiolution, Ma‘ndatbry Settlement
Co'nfererice, and‘Trial
Readiness Conference (:19CECG_01_224)_
Preview
III XAVJER BECER-RA Attorney Gene1al of California HARINDER K. KAPUR FflLEED t~>.. Senior Assistant Attorney Genera} State Bar Number: 19876-9 STACEY L. ROBERTS Superv'ising Deputy Aftorne-y General State. Bar Number: 23.7998 i600 West Broadway, Suite 1800 San Diego, CA 92101 P.0 Box 85266. San Diego, CA 92186-5266 RECEIVED Telephone: (.6l9) 738- 940.7 AM 12/19/2019 11' 19 ‘ Fax. (6.] 9)645-2061 FRESNOBCOUNTY SUPERIOR COURT B:Ay Ramos Deputy E—mail. Harinder. Kapur@,doj .c'a. gov Aflmmneys'fo'r Bureau o'fC annabz's, Comm] .and Lari Ajax, Chiefof the' Bure'au 'of-C‘ann'abi-s Exemptfi‘omflmg fees C'onIr01 pzilsz'lqnl t0G01! Code 5561 03 10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATEDF CALIFORNIA Ijl COUNTY OF FRESNO '12. 13 1:4 3 5' ‘1. COUNTY 0F SANTA CRUZ, ET AL, CaseNo. 190130601224 1'6- Plainti'fl‘s, JOINT PETITION AND ORDER RE: EXEMPTION FROM [FWD] 17 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION, MANDATORY :18 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE, AND BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL; TRIAL READINESS CONFERENCE '19 LORI. AJAX in her official gcapacity as Chief of' the Bureau 0f Cannabis Control; 20 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Dept: 5102 The- Honorable A_IanM ‘ Judge: Simpson 2.1 Defendants. TrialDa'te: Aptilzo, 2020 Action Filed: April4 2019 22 23 Plaintiffs Céuntny-Santa Cruz, et a],(Plaintiffs) filed a complaint: for decglaratory relief 2.4 against Defe'njdanfi. 'Bufeau'of'Cannabis Control and Lqr-i Aj a-x, her official capacity as the; :in. 25. Chief ofthe Bureau of'Cannabis Control, (Defendants) alleging 't'hat the Cal-ifornia..Code of 26 Regulations, titie16, section 54:16,. subdivision (d) (Cannabis DéliVery Regulation) i's invalid Because it isinconsistentwifh Proposition 64 and the M'edi‘r;in'aland Adiflt—Use; Cannabis. 23‘ Regulation ”and Safety Act (California B'u’s'in'esS a‘n'd Ptofe'ss'ibns Code section 26000; seq.) et. l Joint Petition and [Proposed] Older Re.Exemption fiomAltemati've Dispute. Resolution, Mandatory Settlement- Conference, and Trial Readiness Conference (l 9CEGG01224 4) ’— Because this-case involves purely aquestion 0f law (i.e.,the validity of’theCann’abis Delivery N Regulation),- Plaintiffs- and Defendants seek an order from the Court exempting-the parties from U3 the following Court requirements and dates: -§ 1. Alternative Dispute Resolution requirement pursuant to Local Rule, Rule 2.4.1 and *UI Civil Standing Order No. 07-0628; O\ 2. Hearing on Order to Show Cause re: Alternative Dispute Resolution Stipulation 0n Q January 21? 2020 at3:30p.m.; 00 _3.¢ Mandatory Settlement Conference on April 2, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.; and, \O 4‘ 'Tri'alReadiness Conference on April 17, 2020 at 9:30-Vay.m; The parties are seeking exemption from/these requirements and Court dates pursuant to Local Rule 2.5.1 and 2.6.2 on the grounds that this case involves strictly a legal question regarding Whether the Cannabis Delivery Regulation 'is consistent with Proposition64 and the Medicinal and Adult-Use’Cannabi's Regulation and Safety Act, the parties concurrently filed a proposed trialbriefing Schedule, and itwould be extremefy unlikely that alternative dispute resolution and a settlement conference Will resolve this dispute over the interpretation of Cannabis Delivery Regulation. IT IS SO STIPUL‘ATED. Dated: December [2,2019 Respectfully Submitted, ' XAVIER' BECERRA OO\)O\UIALRN~O©OONO\M&WN~‘O Attemey General of Céli'fomiar HARINDER K. KAPUR > ' < y Senior Assistant Attorney General amg fl‘ flb/Ldj” 1A EY L. ROB S pervisingD‘eputy Attorney General Attorneysfor Defendant’s, Bureau of Cannabis Control and Lori Ajax, Chiefo the Bureau quannabis Control ’7 ... Joint Petition and [Proposed] Order Re: Exemption fi'om..Altemative Dispute Resolution, Mandatory Settlement Conference, and Trial Readiness Conference (I9CEC601224) u Dated: December}; 2019 , Respectfimy. Submitted, CHURCHWELL WHITE LLP ‘, VENGg-CHURCHWELL Attorneysfor Plaintzfl's emumma~wp '3 and [Proposed] Order Re: Exemption Jo'im-Petitio‘n fi’o'mAltemativeDiSpute Rosa'lutiom Mandatory Sefilement Conferedcg, and Trial Readifiess Conference (19CECGOI224) ORDER [\J Good. cause appearingthereibr; the Court hereby Orders that: 1.. Theparti'es are'eixe-mp't from th‘e—A'lt‘emat‘iv’e Dispute Resolution requirement set fofih Under Local Rule, Rule 2.4.1' and Ci-‘vil;Stahdirig Order No. 07-0628; f2, The Hearing ,on- Order-io..Show Cause re: Alternative Dispute ResolutiQnSIipuIation on January '21-; 2020 at 3:30 p.m._ is vacated;- sb-ocfii'dx-Lntpw 3. The parties a're ‘e-‘Xe'mpt the f1"o_1'_n Mandatory Settlement Céuf'erence' under- ngal Rule, Rule 25. 1; 4.. The. Mandatony' Settlement Conference ‘on April 2, 2020. at I'OEOO _a.-I'n. is vacated; 10 4. The parties are exempt frOm Readiness COhference under 2.6.2; and the- Tria‘]. 11. 6.. The'Trial Readingss COnferende‘ on April 17, 20,20 at 9:330 am. isvacated \ 12 LT IS SO ORDERED; 1:3 .14 DATED: /// 5/“ WCM‘W JUDGE QFTHE/SUPERIOR COURT ' 15 1-6: :12 1.8 ' '19 20 2.1 2'2 2'13 , 24 2'5 /' 26 :27 28' 4 O'fd'e‘r‘ Petition Jbfiirit and [Pr?opos'ed] Ré: Exemption: frbm Alte'mativesDispu‘l‘el Refiolution, Ma‘ndatbry Settlement Co'nfererice, and‘Trial Readiness Conference (:19CECG_01_224)_