Dispensary closes doors after court battle


Victor Morales
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it  
November 13, 2009



More than 100 members of South Coast Patients Collective Association now have to find another source for their medical marijuana.

That's how many people were served by the Cathedral City dispensary, its attorney Anthony Curiale said.

South Coast, which had been embroiled in a legal fight with the city, locked its doors last week, Curiale said.

A sign taped to the door at the dispensary said it was ordered to close by the city attorney “until further notice.”

An Appellate Court judge ruled on Oct. 30 against South Coast, which sought to suspend a preliminary injunction to stop operations. The injunction was granted to the city from a superior court.

“My clients are law-abiding citizens although they regret the decision by the court,” Curiale said.

Located in an office suite at 68-487 E. Palm Canyon Drive, South Coast “can no longer operate,” City Attorney Charles Green said last week following the court's decision.

“We are hoping that this completes the matter,” he said.

But Curiale said he filed a petition on Monday to the California Supreme Court to review the case. The court is required to respond in 60 days. If the high court rejects hearing the case, Curiale said he could still seek a trial.

“We are not certain where we are going to go at this point,” Curiale said.

City officials discovered the dispensary operating without a business license on July 28, a month after a city ordinance banning medical marijuana sales was adopted. Seven Coachella Valley cities prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries.

The city was granted a temporary injunction by the Indio Branch of the Riverside County Superior Court on Aug. 31. But the dispensary appealed on the grounds that the city's ban violates several state codes that allow “primary caregivers” to provide medical marijuana to a “qualified patient.”

The dispensary continued to operate while the court considered its appeal.


http://www.mydesert.com/article/20091113/NEWS01/911120369/1026/news12