While many Californians consider the legality of cannabis to be settled law, the ongoing conflict between California and federal laws on the subject continue to give rise to unexpected outcomes when it comes to real property law.
On October 29, 2024, the California Court of Appeal reached a decision in JCCrandall LLC v. County of Santa Barbara. In that case, JCCrandall asked the Court of Appeal to review the County's issuance of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) allowing a company called Santa Rita Holdings, Inc., to cultivate cannabis. While the cannabis would not be grown on JCCrandall's land, Santa Rita could not access the parcel where the cannabis would be growing without using an easement that crossed JCCrandall's land. The owner of the land to be cultivated by Santa Rita Holdings had an easement — granted by deed in 1998 — for ingress and egress across JCCrandall's land.
JCCrandall objected to the CUP and Santa Rita's use of the easement for cannabis cultivation purposes. The County issued the CUP over JCCrandall's objection. In doing so, the County found that the roads and highways were "adequate" for the proposed use, in part because the easement had been historically used for agricultural purposes. The trial court upheld the County's decision.
Read more at JD Supra