Wash. Rev. Code § 69.50.328

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Neither a licensed cannabis producer nor a licensed cannabis processor shall have a direct or indirect financial interest in a licensed cannabis retailer.

[ 2022 c 16 s 57; 2013 c 3 s 5 (Initiative Measure No. 502, approved November 6, 2012).]

Notes:

Intent—Finding—2022 c 16: See note following RCW 69.50.101.

Intent—2013 c 3 (Initiative Measure No. 502): See note following RCW 69.50.101.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2021–2024 · leading case: Raz Yaron, V. Sierra Conley

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Raz Yaron, V. Sierra Conley (2021) washctapp · cites it 4× “” It gave “great deference to the expertise and opinion of the [LCB] in this matter” but concluded that, because “Yaron was neither a licensed marijuana producer or processor nor a partial owner of [ ] such a business, his ownership interest in” Mary Jane did not violate RCW…”

Raz Yaron, Respondent/cr-appellant V. Sierra S. Conley, Appellant/cr-respondent (2024) washctapp “Following a bench trial, the court concluded that because Yaron was neither a licensed cannabis producer nor the partial owner of such a business, his ownership interest in Mary Jane did not violate RCW 69.50.328. But the court determined that because Yaron held an ownership…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.