A Puget Sound-area cannabis entrepreneur cannot pursue claims that local law enforcement damaged company property seized during an arrest on felony charges that were ultimately dropped, a Seattle federal judge has ruled, saying the businessman signed away his right to litigation.
OG Article: here
View our Fair Use Policy: here
Levi Lyon "waived" his right to bring claims against Thurston County when he signed an agreement that returned his seized property provided he paid a $200 storage fee, according to a Thursday order by U.S. Magistrate Judge S. Kate Vaughan.
"The correct interpretation of that waiver, therefore, is that plaintiff Lyon forfeited the right to bring any claim whatsoever that relates to the seizure and storage of his property," the judge said. "This includes the very causes of action and subject matter of the claims brought against Thurston defendants here."
The judge's order gave a summary judgment win to the county's board of commissioners and sheriff's office and the state Liquor Control and Cannabis Board, among others.
According to the court record, the Thurston County Narcotics Task Force and state cannabis board arrested Lyon and seized some of his business property, including laptops and two buses, in November 2019. While he was charged with three felonies that another county attempted to prosecute him for, those charges were dropped in early 2021, the court record said.
Lyon sought to get his seized property back through a forfeiture hearing, but the Thurston County Prosecuting Attorney's Office offered him a deal where he could get this stuff back in exchange for a "parking/storage fee," the court record said. The two sides signed the agreement on March 12, 2021, the court record said.
But the county returned the buses in damaged condition requiring extensive repairs, Lyon claimed in court filings.
"It must be noted that the [the narcotics task force] did not allow Mr. Lyon to view the buses prior to signing the stipulated order," he said in April filing to the court. The task force also "did not return all of the property it had seized. The property — that has still not been returned — includes business records and computers that are vital to Mr. Lyon's business."
But Judge Vaughan ruled that the place to dispute these claims was in the forfeiture hearing, and by signing the agreement he essentially closed off his ability to dispute the conditions of his products. Additionally, the agreement explicitly precluded him from bringing any claims in court, the judge said.
Beyond that, Judge Vaughan noted that there was a lack of evidence, such as before and after photos of the buses, to prove they were damaged by the task force. Lyon also failed to explicitly list which items were still being held by the county.
Comments