Sonoma Cannabis Farm Says Complaining Neighbors Have No Case
Residents living near the marijuana grown by Green Earth Coffee said it generates an overpowering “skunk-like stench” that permeates their homes.
October 16, 2018 at 06:49 PM
4 minute read
A Sonoma County marijuana farmer, facing a civil racketeering lawsuit from neighbors unhappy with the smells and sounds, says the plaintiffs haven't suffered financially and their claims should be tossed.
Carlos Zambrano, operator of the Green Earth Coffee cultivation site near Petaluma, said in a motion to dismiss filed Monday in federal court that the nine neighbors suing him haven't stated a valid claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO.
“Plaintiffs' allegations of personal injuries and annoyances from the smells and sounds coming from the cannabis farm, as well as speculative reduction in their property value from living next to a cannabis business, are decidedly not actionable under RICO because they do not constitute concrete (i.e. 'out of pocket' monetary) damage to 'business or property,'” wrote Kenneth Stratton, chief counsel for Rogoway Law Group in Santa Rosa, who is representing Zambrano and Green Earth Coffee.
➤➤ Get the latest cannabis lawyering, compliance and commentary straight to your inbox with Higher Law, a new Law.com briefing. Learn more and sign up here.
Residents living near the marijuana grown by Green Earth Coffee said it generates an overpowering “skunk-like stench” that permeates their homes, hinders outdoor activities and compounds various neighbors' ailments. Some neighbors also cite the irritating drone of a running generator.
The neighbors in August sued Zambrano, Green Earth Coffee, property owner Flying Rooster, and deed of trust holder Exchange Bank for alleged violations of racketeering and state and local laws. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, seeks treble damages on the racketeering claims as well as punitive damages, an order stopping the grow, attorney fees and legal costs.
“Defendants' operation of the cannabis enterprise through repeated acts of racketeering has directly and proximately injured plaintiffs' property,” the plaintiffs' lawyers, Kevin Block and Roman Block of Block & Block in Napa, wrote in the complaint. “The open and ongoing commission of federal crimes near plaintiffs' homes further diminishes their market value by causing potential buyers to fear associated criminal activity or by otherwise making the homes less attractive to potential buyers.”
Neighbors and opponents of marijuana operations around the country have increasingly turned to the federal racketeering act, better known for its use in organized crime prosecutions, to fight an activity that, while state-legal in some instances, is still prohibited by federal law.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit last year reinstated claims brought by landowners near a Colorado grow. A federal judge in Oregon in August dismissed RICO claims brought by grow-site neighbors, saying the plaintiffs had failed to show they had suffered financial harm. A racketeering complaint against a medical marijuana dispensary is still pending in Massachusetts federal court.
Green Earth Coffee operations has been under Sonoma County regulators' scrutiny since May, when a code enforcement inspector found that marijuana was being grown on the Adobe Road site without a permit. The company applied for a county license in April but had not been granted one by the time of the inspection.
Under terms of a settlement agreement with the county, a copy of which was included with the Oct. 15 motion to dismiss, Green Earth Coffee this month agreed to stop all marijuana operations at the site by Nov. 15. The company also agreed to pay the county $415,000 for costs, current and back taxes and penalties. The agreement also requires the property owner, Flying Rooster, to record a covenant “permanently prohibiting” commercial cannabis operations at the site.
The grow's impending closure, Stratton wrote, means that the neighbors' claims don't support a required finding under RICO that the alleged wrongdoing threatens long-term criminal activity.
Block said in an email Tuesday that the settlement, if fully complied with, will only affect the neighbors' request for an injunction, not their claims for damages and attorney fees.
Read more:
Lawyers Advising on State Cannabis Won't Break Bar Rule
Sonoma Residents Sue Marijuana Farm Over Alleged 'Skunk-like Stench'
New Cannabis Industry Suit Alleges Fraudulent Business Practices
Why Patent Lawyers Are Watching This Colorado Cannabis Case
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLaw Firms Expand Scope of Immigration Expertise Amid Blitz of Trump Orders
6 minute readMeta’s New Content Guidelines May Result in Increased Defamation Lawsuits Among Users
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250