People’s California, LLC (“People’s California”) Subsidiary ‘Peoples Vape’ Evicted for Non-Payment of Rent at Blüm Santa Ana
On June 12, 2024, Blüm Holdings (OTCQB: BLMH) announced a favorable court ruling in an unlawful detainer action against Peoples Vape, , a subsidiary of People's California. The court's June 6, 2024 Minute Order permits Blüm Santa Ana to obtain a writ of possession, cancels People’s Vape’s rental agreement due to non-payment since March 2023, and allows for a money judgment of $102,530 in unpaid rent, $34,487 in holdover damages, and $435 in costs. The court dismissed all defenses raised by People’s Vape. Subsequently, Unrivaled Brands agreed not to enforce the order, and People’s Vape agreed to vacate the premises.
- Court granted Blüm Santa Ana the right to obtain a writ of possession.
- Rental agreement cancellation for People’s Vape.
- Money judgment awarded: $102,530 in unpaid rent, $34,487 in holdover damages, and $435 in costs.
- Court dismissed all affirmative defenses raised by People’s Vape.
- Non-payment of rent by People’s Vape since March 2023.
- Legal proceedings indicating internal conflicts with tenants.
SANTA ANA, Calif., June 12, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Blum Holdings, Inc. (OTCQB: BLMH) (the “Company,” “Blüm,” “we” or “us”), a cannabis company with subsidiaries operating throughout California, announces the successful outcome in the unlawful detainer action brought by Unrivaled Brands, Inc.’s then subsidiary People’s First Choice, LLC (“Blüm Santa Ana”) against Peoples Vape, LLC (“People’s Vape”), formerly known as PF-People's Grand TC, LLC, a subsidiary of People's California. On June 6, 2024, the Court issued a Minute Order ordering that permits Blüm Santa Ana to obtain a writ of possession for the premises, cancels People’s Vape’s rental agreement, and allows Blüm Santa Ana to obtain a money judgment against People’s Vape resulting from People’s failure to pay rent since at least March 2023.
The Court found that People’s Vape’s Managing Member, Bernard Steimann, who is also the founder and majority owner of People’s California, executed a settlement agreement with Unrivaled that validly amended People’s Vape’s sublease and increased the rent to
In an effort to defend the case, People’s Vape claimed, among other things, that, even though Mr. Steimann controls both People’s California and People’s Vape, the settlement did not require People’s Vape to pay rent, that Blüm Santa Ana had failed to execute an amended lease, and that Blüm Santa Ana had refused a tender of rent. The Court found that “none of the affirmative defenses raised by People’s Vape have any merit.” In addition to cancelling People’s Vape’s rental agreement and ordering a writ of possession, the court awarded Blüm Santa Ana
People’s Vape is a subsidiary of People’s California whose managing members include Frank Kavanaugh, CEO of Medalist Diversified REIT, Inc. (“MDRR”), Bernard Steimann, managing member of People’s California, and Jay Yadon of New Patriot Holdings. People’s was represented by Deron Colby of Janus Capital Law Firm and General Counsel of MDRR and Blüm Santa Ana was represented by Roger Scott of Buchalter law firm.
About Blüm Holdings
Blüm Holdings is a leader in the cannabis sector. Our commitment to quality, innovation, and customer service makes us a trusted name in the cannabis industry, dedicated to shaping its future. Blüm Holdings, through its subsidiaries, operates leading dispensaries throughout California as well as several leading company-owned brands including Korova, known for its high potency products across multiple product categories, including the legendary 1000 mg THC Black Bar.
For more info, please visit: https://blumholdings.com.
Contact:
Jason Assad
LR Advisors LLC.
jassad@blumholdings.com
678-570-6791
Cautionary Language Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this communication regarding matters that are not historical facts, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, known as the PSLRA. These include statements regarding management's intentions, plans, beliefs, expectations, or forecasts for the future, and, therefore, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on them. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed, and actual results may differ materially from those projected. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except to the extent required by law. The Company uses words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “plans,” “expects,” “projects,” “future,” “intends,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” “guidance,” and similar expressions to identify these forward-looking statements that are intended to be covered by the safe-harbor provisions of the PSLRA. Such forward-looking statements are based on the Company’s expectations and involve risks and uncertainties; consequently, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in the statements due to a number of factors.
New factors emerge from time-to-time and it is not possible for the Company to predict all such factors, nor can the Company assess the impact of each such factor on the business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. These risks, as well as other risks associated with the combination, will be more fully discussed in the Company’s reports with the SEC. Additional risks and uncertainties are identified and discussed in the “Risk Factors” section of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other documents filed from time to time with the SEC. Forward-looking statements included in this release are based on information available to the Company as of the date of this release. The Company undertakes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this release.
FAQ
What was the court ruling on Blüm (BLMH) and People’s Vape’s rental dispute?
How much unpaid rent was People’s Vape ordered to pay Blüm (BLMH)?
When did People’s Vape fail to pay rent, according to the court ruling involving Blüm (BLMH)?
What was the outcome for Blüm Santa Ana in their legal action against People’s Vape (BLMH)?