Hammer v. Today’s Health Care II, Co.
Maricopa County, Arizona, Superior Court
Nos. CV2011-051310 and -051311 (April 17, 2012)
- Written by Patrick Speice, JD
Facts
Michele Hammer (plaintiff) loaned $250,000 to Today’s Health Care II (THC) (defendant) for the express purpose of building a medical-marijuana center to cultivate and distribute marijuana in Colorado, which had enacted a medical-marijuana law allowing such activities. THC failed to repay the loan as required by the loan agreement and related promissory note, and Hammer sued THC for breach of contract. Hammer moved for summary judgment, claiming that the loan agreement and promissory note were enforceable contracts. THC also moved for summary judgment, arguing that the contracts were unenforceable as against public policy because the purpose was to facilitate an unlawful act—construction of a medical-marijuana center. Although construction and operation of a medical-marijuana center in Colorado was legal under Colorado’s medical-marijuana law, the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) prohibited the cultivation and distribution of marijuana and use of real property for engaging in prohibited marijuana-related activities.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McVey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.