Sweetflower Pasadena v. City of Pasadena CA2/7
SweetFlower Pasadena, LLC filed a verified petition for writ of mandate and complaint seeking to compel the City of Pasadena to set aside a conditional use permit the City had granted to SweetFlower’s competitor, Harvest of Pasadena, LLC, and to obtain a judicial declaration that Harvest’s conditional use permit was invalid, making Harvest ineligible to obtain the additional permits required to open and operate a retail cannabis store in the City. Harvest, named in SweetFlower’s petition/complaint as real party in interest, filed a special motion to strike all or part of the petition/complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The trial court denied Harvest’s motion, concluding none of SweetFlower’s claims arose from protected speech or petitioning activity. We affirm.
Comments on Sweetflower Pasadena v. City of Pasadena CA2/7