legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Vishnevsky v. Zingerman CA2/2
In April 2009, appellant and Zingerman purchased GHDF, a cannabis collective. They were GHDF’s sole shareholders, directors, and officers. In May 2009, they made GHDF a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation. Zingerman operated the business’s day-to-day affairs.
In July 2009, Zingerman was arrested at GHDF for drug possession with intent to sell; he pleaded guilty to a felony in 2010. As part of Zingerman’s plea, the court ordered the closure of GHDF. Zingerman did not call a board meeting to discuss his agreement to close GHDF in his criminal case.
In 2012, Zingerman successfully petitioned the court to dismiss his conviction but did not inform appellant about it. Appellant asked Zingerman every year about reopening the business; he told her it was impossible because GHDF was shuttered by court order. Zingerman advised appellant in 2018 that he consulted an attorney who told him “ ‘the shop is dead’ ” and its license could not be restored.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale