The Kind and Compassionate v. City of Long Beach
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs, two medical cannabis collectives/dispensaries and three medical cannabis patients, alleged 11 causes of action against the City and/or its employees. Plaintiffs' claims arose from the City's enforcement of municipal ordinances that first regulated and then entirely prohibited the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries within the City’s borders. Plaintiffs primarily allege that the city ordinances regulating, and then banning medical marijuana dispensaries discriminate against persons with disabilities. The court concluded that this claim has no merit and that the trial court properly sustained the city’s demurrer to plaintiffs’ causes of action for violations of the Disabled Persons Act (DPA), Civil Code section 54; the Unruh Civil Rights Act, Civil Code section 51; the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 41 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; and the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. 794. The court's conclusion is controlled by now well-established principles that the Compassionate Use Act (CUA), Health & Saf. Code, 11362.5, and the Medical Marijuana Program (MMP), Health & Saf. Code, 1162.7 et seq., remove state-level criminal and civil sanctions from specified medical marijuana activities, but they do not establish a comprehensive state system of legalized medical marijuana; or grant a right of convenient access to marijuana for medicinal use; or override the zoning, licensing, and police powers of local jurisdictions; or mandate local accommodation of medical marijuana cooperatives, collectives, or dispensaries. The court rejected plaintiffs' remaining claims of constitutional violations and state tort claims and affirmed the judgment.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.