Ronald Semler was a trustee for the Semler Family Trust. The Trust was presented with an opportunity to participate in a private placement investment in ARI Overland Management LLC. Semler agreed to purchase five $250,000 units in the LLC. ARI was negotiating with GE Capital for financing, and GE refused to agree to the loan to ARI because Semler was a member and he had been convicted of a felony. He was convicted of tax and export violations, sentenced to concurrent sentences of two and three years, and ordered to pay a fine of $40,000.
GE's refusal to lend was challenged as discriminatory. What should the court do and why? [Semler v General Electric Capital Corporation, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1380 (2011)]