In 2022, look for legalization in Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Arkansas—but don't expect it to pass in Congress.
The post 36 cannabis predictions for 2022 guaranteed to come true appeared first on Leafly.
I really fought myself on putting together a festivus post of all that went wrong for the cannabis industry in 2021. Instead, I want to focus on the positives for 2022 as the industry continues to mature and expand across the U.S. and abroad. As 2021 comes to a close, here’s what I’m looking forward to in cannabis next year:
2021 was a total failure when it comes to federal legalization. We got more than enough lip service from Democrats about how legalization and reform would be a top priority. None of that came to fruition, and it appears that Democrats even actively fought against some pretty meaningful banking reform by killing off the SAFE Banking Act as part of the NDAA. I still have hope that proposed legislation like the States Reform Act will make its way into reality in 2022.
California takes it on the head repeatedly for its broken down cannabis licensing program. The state has all kinds of issues regarding licensing backlog, onerous regulatory red tape, overwhelming local control, and, of course, some of the highest cannabis taxes around. While COVID recovery has been the star of the state for a long while, I’m hoping cannabis tax reform can garner some attention given the state of the industry in that high taxes are a major impediment to competing with the illegal market. While I don’t agree with any planned “tax revolt,” I whole heartedly agree with getting these laws changed and taxes lowered in 2022.
New York is probably the most exciting state on the horizon regarding the launch of its long-awaited adult use program. We’ve kept an eye on the state and are patiently waiting like everyone else for things to kick off. Hopefully New York will learn from the mistakes of other states and borrow only the good state law and policy at the same time. I really see 2022 as a building year for New York cannabis, which will be a great opportunity for the state to develop its program in close concert with stakeholders of all kinds.
It used to be that cannabis legalization really only came through on voter initiatives. Not so anymore. There are a number of states where solid cannabis legalization bills are making their way through legislatures. This is an incredibly good sign that cannabis no longer has to wait for “democracy in action” to see change. Plus, more states are definitely poised to flirt with legalization through voter initiatives in November elections in 2022. Delaware (adult use), Oklahoma (adult use), Mississippi, North Carolina, Wyoming, and Pennsylvania (adult use) are just a few on this list.
There was a lot of cannabis M&A in 2021 (just check out the latest Pfizer deal, which made a lot of splashy headlines), but 2022 is likely to be an even bigger year for deals in the space. MSOs have been aggressively pursuing acquisitions in a multitude of states in 2021, and I doubt they’ll slow down in 2022 as more states come online for adult use. Plus, if we do get any form of federal legalization (or SAFE Banking makes a comeback) in 2022, it will definitely spur dealmaking. Don’t forget, if you’re buying a cannabis business, be sure to do it the right way!
We recently did a webinar with Clifford Chance where we examined several international markets that have cannabis in the mix. There’s no doubt that international trade around cannabis will continue to pick up in 2022 and that more countries around the world will examine legalization or medicalization. A short list of exciting recent examples is Malta, Germany, and Luxembourg.
Per usual, not all is doom and gloom for U.S. cannabis even after a tough year for federal legal reform. I sincerely look forward to what 2022 brings to the industry. Onward and upward!
The post Cannabis in 2022: Let’s Look Forward Instead of Back appeared first on Harris Bricken.
Studies show that THCV boosts energy, curbs appetite, and has nicotine craving suppression effects. Find THCV gummies for you.
The post Want to exercise more, eat less, or quit smoking? THCV could kickstart your New Year’s resolutions appeared first on Leafly.
On December 29, United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 328—representing roughly 11,000 Rhode Island and Massachusetts frontline workers—announced a victory for Greenleaf Compassionate Care Center employees in Portsmouth, Rhode Island, preserving their right to openly discuss unions and other workers’ rights.
Like most other industries, workers in medical cannabis operations and dispensaries want employee protections and fair pay. A
Greenleaf Compassionate Care Center employee and worker committee member was terminated last June once he was exposed negotiating the first union contract for employees.After “months of investigations” conducted by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), UFCW Local 328 filed charges against Greenleaf Compassionate Care Center for violating workers’ rights, culminating in the termination of employee and bargaining committee member Ben Telford.
Other charges include the elimination of employee discounts during a six-week period, the elimination of the Friday lunch program and transfer of bargaining unit work to a new classification. The list of charges continues—including “interrogation, surveillance and disparagement of employees” for their union activity.
The employees at Greenleaf held a one-day strike planned in a June 26 press release, to protest the illegal firing of Telford, who was illegally terminated for his union activity. UpriseRI arrived on-scene at the protest in Portsmouth, Rhode Island, in support of Telford. UpriseRI insisted that CEO Seth Bock reinstate Telford.
After an investigation, the NLRB issued complaints on each of these charges against Greenleaf. Just a day before the trial was set to take place, Greenleaf offered to settle on every complaint.
“Securing justice for Ben was significant because it not only holds the company accountable for breaking the law, but it also sends a message to workers everywhere that they have rights on the job to organize,” UFCW Local 328 Director of Organizing Sam Marvin told High Times. “At UFCW, we are proud to stand with workers to build a better and more secured future and are committed to holding employers accountable when there are injustices at work.”
Rhode Island Greenleaf Cannabis Workers shared the same sentiment. “We are pleased with the results of the investigations from the National Labor Relations Board and the signed commitments we secured in this settlement agreement,” Rhode Island Greenleaf Cannabis Workers said in a joint statement. “We would like to extend our sincerest gratitude to the NLRB for their hard work during the investigation of numerous labor complaints that were filed against our employer. While we should not have had to experience these unfair labor practices to begin with, it was extremely reassuring to know that we as workers had a formal means of recourse when our employer committed these infractions. While forming a union can be a challenging and arduous process, we know that it is one of the few options we have as workers to create a more stable and predictable future.”Rhode Island Greenleaf Cannabis Workers encourage employees in other states to take note.
“We encourage workers to continue to organize with each other both within individual companies and across the industry,” the joint statement continues. “We want to thank UFCW Local 328 for all of its continued support and the resources we’ve been given through this process. We look forward to continuing to build a healthier and secured future for all of us at Greenleaf by completing our first union contract in the near future.”
UFCW Local 328 announced that the new settlement with Greenleaf Compassionate Care Center and its unionized cannabis workers includes the following key items:
Per the NLRB settlement agreement, Greenleaf has offered Telford reinstatement to his position and will compensate him with full back pay for all lost wages, interest and additional compensation.
“We are proud of the workers at Greenleaf for standing together to achieve this victory,” Marvin stated. “It is critical that employers are held accountable when they break the law and violate workers’ rights. This settlement represents a significant achievement for Greenleaf workers in their pursuit for justice and fairness at their workplace, and we look forward to continuing to work together to build the futures they all have earned.”
The post Worker Illegally Fired from Cannabis Company for Union Involvement Wins Job Back appeared first on High Times.
According to a new research report, “Changes in and correlates of Australian public attitudes toward illicit drug use,” published in the Drug and Alcohol Review, attitudes towards cannabis have rather dramatically shifted in Australia.
The National Drug Strategy Household Survey (or NDSHS) is a national cross-sectional survey of drug and alcohol use in Australians aged 14 and older. It excludes those in hospitals, nursing homes, those with no fixed addresses and or serving in the military, in prison and those who do not speak English. Conducted every three years, it normally samples about 20,000 people using random sampling spread across 15 different regions.
The first finding is the most interesting if not exactly surprising. Namely, support for legalization of cannabis rose only a few points between 2007 and 2013, but much more dramatically from 25.5 percent of the population in 2013 to 41.1 percent by 2019. Support for legalizing other forms of drugs, like cocaine and ecstasy also rose dramatically, although not as much as for cannabis. Support did not change noticeably for a change in the legalization of heroin.
The study also found that support for legalization is unaffected by age except those older than 50. Men are still more supportive of legalization than women, as are university graduates. Native Australians are also more supportive of cannabis use than expats. Employment status is unrelated to the support of legalization.
Finally, the number of people supporting punishment for possession of small amounts for personal use has continued to drop.
The most significant findings of the study are no surprise. Australia has moved forward steadily on medical reform for the past several years. This in and of itself has always changed the conversation—and in every legalizing jurisdiction and country so far. See North America as well as Europe to date since 2013.
While support for the legalization of other “illicit” drugs also was found to have increased, which is in part a generational response to the punitive nature of the War on Drugs, support is also markedly greater for cannabis.
Support across generations is also consistent with other studies elsewhere, despite the Boomers’ reputation as the generation which “rediscovered” cannabis (as well as other illicit drugs).
It is undeniable that the impact of reform in North America (in both Canada and the U.S.) has impacted the discussion about cannabis reform elsewhere since the turn of the century and even more since the start of the last decade’s events, which saw legalization movements take hold in both the U.S. and Canada. This also has everything to do with how news of reform has spread—namely carried through digital, social media channels.
However, one thing is clear. In the last decade, cannabis reform has become a global topic, including of course in Australia.
The answer to that question is very much up in the air, particularly now.
As of just last December, the last national German poll on the topic showed that just under 50 percent of Germans now supported recreational reform. As of this year, full-boat legalization is high on the agenda of the new political coalition.
Given the fact that cannabis reform generally in Australia has been influenced by, if not has tracked German developments, this could mean that as early as next year, the issue could be brought up again on a national level here too.
Last year, the first cannabis legalization specific political party was formed in Queensland. This year, a “territory” effort in Victoria was squashed in August. The issue has been heating up there for the last several years, gaining more steam, unsurprisingly, on the national level, as medical reform has progressed.
The fact that Australia is also, like other countries, beginning to consider cannabis reform as a valuable source of domestic taxation beyond a high value crop designed for export, is clearly another reason why the issue will undoubtedly continue to progress.
Interestingly, the study was also published as the national health regulator in Australia rejected psychedelics for therapeutic use.
One thing is also undeniably clear during the period this study has taken place—namely the importance also of English-speaking, global digital, pro-cannabis media. This in turn has absolutely driven the largest countries in the world where English is the spoken language to forward the issue in every case since Uruguay.
The fact that Germany will become the largest industrial country to legalize recreational use as soon as potentially next year, at least legislatively, will also make an impact. Starting with the fact that Deutschland is already of interest to those in the Australian medical industry seeking to sell to this market.
No matter what, in other words, the Aussies appear now to be on the brink of greater reform. And like New Zealand, which also narrowly defeated recreational reform last year in the general election by just over two points, not to mention in other countries, steady as she goes at this point means that majorities in most democratic, Western nations will be in the “for” column within the next couple of years.
In the meantime, a burgeoning industry will find a way to make its way through the regulatory spaces and developments. And that includes, of course, the conversation down under.
The post Australia Cannabis Legalization Support Has Doubled in Six Years appeared first on High Times.
Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves revealed on Tuesday that he will not sign a medical cannabis bill proposed by state lawmakers, saying the legislation allows patients access to too much medical cannabis. In a message posted to Facebook, the Republican governor wrote that he would support the measure if the legislature cuts the daily cap on medical marijuana purchases in half.
“I hope that legislative leaders will see fit to consider reducing the tremendous amount of weed they seek to make legally accessible so that I can sign their bill and we can put this issue to rest,” Reeves wrote.
Mississippi voters approved Initiative 65, a ballot measure to legalize the medicinal use of marijuana, in November 2020. However, in May, the Mississippi Supreme Court overturned the statute, citing constitutional inconsistencies in the state’s initiative process.
In September, negotiators with the Mississippi Senate and House of Representatives announced that they had reached an agreement on a medical cannabis plan that has key differences compared to Initiative 65, including provisions that would allow local jurisdictions to regulate where medical marijuana could be cultivated, processed and sold.
On Tuesday, Reeves said that the bill drafted by lawmakers addresses some of his worries about launching a medical marijuana program in Mississippi. But the governor added that he is still concerned with the question of how much cannabis a patient will be permitted to purchase.
“Unlike any other drug, this program allows virtually unlimited access to marijuana once you qualify. There is no pharmacist involved and no doctor setting the amount,” said Reeves. “There is only what legislators call a ‘budtender’ serving you pot.”
Reeves noted that under the legislature’s plan, patients would be allowed to purchase up to 3.5 grams of medical cannabis per day. Writing that a “simple google search shows that the average joint has 0.32 grams of marijuana,” Reeves said that each patient would be entitled to enough cannabis for 11 joints every day. The governor then offered patient statistics from Oklahoma, where about 376,000 patients have registered for the medical cannabis program.
“An equivalent sign-up rate in Mississippi would yield 300,000 Mississippians with a card to get up to 11 joints per day. That would allow the disbursement of 3.3 million joints per day in our state, which is the equivalent of approximately 100 million joints per month,” Reeves extrapolated. “That would be 1.2 billion legal joints sold in Mississippi per year. Call me crazy, but I just think that’s too broad of a starting point.”
Instead, Reeves suggested that lawmakers drastically cut the daily cap on medical cannabis purchases.
“I am asking the Legislature to simply cut that amount in half to start the program,” he wrote. “It is a simple fix.”
Reeves also suggested that the limit on medical cannabis could be revisited if the amended cap proves to be insufficient for patient needs.
“We can sit down five years from now and take a thorough review of the actual outcomes,” the governor wrote. “But—as the dad of three daughters that I love dearly—I cannot put my name on a bill that puts that much marijuana on the streets of Mississippi.”
Lawmakers will take up the bill during the new legislative session, which begins early next month. Many cannabis activists are already frustrated with Reeves for failing to follow through on plans to call a special session to consider the matter.
“This program was supposed to have been up and running already,” Citizens Alliance of Mississippi founder Shea Dobson told reporters last month. “I mean, we were supposed to have had medical marijuana in place right now as we speak. And every day that goes by, the governor moves the goalposts; we continue to see patients suffer more.”
The post Mississippi Governor Won’t Sign Medical Cannabis Bill Without Major Changes appeared first on High Times.
Welcome to the sixth annual “State of the State” post on Oregon cannabis. This year was relatively staid compared to 2020, but key features included: a plateau in pricing and regulated sales; intensifying local competition; important new laws, administrative rules and policies; a hollowed out hemp market; and some interesting large company activity.
Backed by strong pandemic tailwinds, Oregon rocketed past the $1 billion sales mark in 2020. In 2021, the state will exceed that number again thanks to a big start. Lately, though, things have slowed appreciably, with a year-over-year decrease logged in every month since June.
Prices dropped throughout the fall as is typical after harvest. Today, the retail market is saturated with $3 grams of flower and $5 edibles. Wholesale flower is running at $900/lb. today versus $1200/lb. a year ago (and $1300 in July of this year). It’s not as bad as the slaughter of 2018, but it’s hard to imagine the $1800/lb. prices of yesteryear ever coming back.
For anyone interested in doing a deeper dive on some of these trends, the OLCC keeps some good “Marijuana Market Data” sets here. What you won’t find in those sets are retailer reports that margins are better than ever. Several of our clients have reported margin increases of 5-10% over the past year or two. The unfortunate corollary, of course, is producers are suffering. Oregon marijuana producers are forever suffering. Craft cannabis growers in particular seem to have lost ground relative to low-cost growers, during COVID.
At this time last year, Oregon had 719 licensed cannabis retailers. Today, there are 760, for a 5.4% increase. The number of producers increased 1,177 from to 1,388, marking an 18% increase– which wasn’t needed at all. Oregon also has 305 licensed processors and 21 licensed testing labs (sorry; I don’t have numbers on these classes from last year). A grand total of 1 licensed researcher exists— we work with them and it’s a funny story.
The ongoing uptick in licensees can be attributed to a couple of factors. The first is just how easy it is– and has always been–to acquire a license in Oregon. Annual license fees hover around $5K, applications are rudimentary, and residency requirements do not exist. The OLCC also did a nice job ramping up its streamlined licensing program this year. Finally, the Commission announced last month that it will resume processing new license applications for everyone but producers– following a very pregnant “pause” exceeding three years.
As to producers, the SB 2018 moratorium on new license applications sunsets in a few days, on January 2, 2022. This means OLCC will once again have to accept these applications. Whether or not the Commission processes them timely is an open question. Another big question is whether the Oregon legislature will instate another moratorium on producer applications in the short session commencing on February 1. The smart money says that it will.
The bottom line is that things are somewhat in flux, as always, and somewhat challenging, as always. A difficult labor market doesn’t help. Finally, with no bona fide export opportunities on the horizon – despite some noteworthy efforts – you can bet 2022 will be a grind too.
We expect to continue to help buy and sell a large number of Oregon cannabis businesses again in 2022, to support our longstanding clients, and wait for federal progress. And that’s it.
Every year, I write a preview of the Oregon legislative session, and a summary at the end. You can expect the 2022 preview next month, and you can read the 2021 summary here. Rather than rehash what happened in the 2021 session, and in the interests of space, I want to focus on a few key developments. Both of these stem from the omnibus hemp bill known as HB 3000 (and to some extent SB 808).
While the ink was still wet on Governor Brown’s HB 3000 signature, the OLCC launched Operation Table Rock in coordination with the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA). The agencies visited 316 registered hemp grow sites in Jackson and Josephine Counties, testing for undercover marijuana. The Commission’s summary of that effort is here. In short, 110 operators were found to be illegally growing high-THC marijuana, whereas 102 operators came back with acceptable test results. A total of 76 farms declined access to their properties, and inspectors were unable to contact an additional 23 locations.
Ultimately, industry watchers were unsurprised that 58% of the samples taken in this effort tested positive for unlawful levels of THC. Much of that product was likely intended for interstate sale; people have long since migrated from the medical marijuana program to hemp for that purpose. That said, smarter people than me took issue with the accuracy of LightLab portable machine tests used in these visits. Concerns over administrative law issues were raised as well, although we don’t have any of that litigation here in the office.
The Table Rock inspections also uncovered illegal water diversions from rivers and creeks (during a drought) and exploitation of immigrant laborers. In related news, the Oregon legislature met on December 13 in a one-day special session and dedicated an additional $25 million to help police, sheriff’s offices and community organizations crack down on unlawful marijuana grows (SB 893). It won’t be enough.
2. OLCC Rulemaking
The second noteworthy development stemming from HB 3000 has been OLCC administrative rulemaking. This Wednesday, December 28, the agency finalized major rule changes on a wide array of issues. These changes cover artificially derived cannabinoids, packaging and labeling, concentration limits, retailer delivery and quite a bit more. This rulemaking deserves a blog post of its own. For now, please check out the comprehensive OLCC bulletin here.
Participation in the ODA hemp market has dropped precipitously. Most of our work in hemp is litigation, nowadays, and even that is slowing down.
As far as market data, ODA does a poor job of publishing compared to OLCC. From what I can find, though, estimated outdoor planted acreage decreased from 27,434 planted acres in 2020, to just 3,800 in 2021. Registered growers roughly halved, from 1,449 to 780. Elsewhere, the State of Florida issued an unintentionally funny warning about Oregon hemp containing rocks and sticks.
So what’s the real problem? People tend to blame FDA for stifling the industry’s growth. That is certainly part of the issue, but states have also cracked down heavily in the last couple of years on delta-8 THC and ingestible hemp products. Most of all, hemp needs to broadly expand into commodities markets, from textiles to building materials. Until that happens, Oregon will lag along with all the other states.
________
For previous posts in this series, check out the following:
The post Oregon Cannabis: State of the State (2021) appeared first on Harris Bricken.
The New Mexico Cannabis Control Division (CCD) announced on December 28 that it has finalized the rules for cannabis manufacturers, retailers and couriers. The final rules were published in Issue 24 of the New Mexico Register. Hundreds of applications for licenses are currently under review.
The rules are effective immediately, with last-minute revisions following several rounds of public comment from small business owners, CEOs and other businesspeople.
“Every day brings us closer to the first adult-use cannabis sales in New Mexico,” Cannabis Control Division Director Kristen Thomson said in a press release. “Thanks to the Cannabis Control Division’s open and transparent rule-making process over the past six months, businesses and consumers can be confident that all necessary support and protection is in place to ensure a thriving cannabis industry in our state.”
Under the state Cannabis Regulation Act, adult sales in New Mexico are scheduled to begin by April 1, 2022. The rules that took effect Tuesday include manufacturing rules that replace emergency manufacturing rules implemented last fall, with intentions to protect workers and improve workplace safety.
The rules outline the licensing of retail stores, with new restrictions. The courier rules set guidelines for safe delivery and proper distribution of cannabis products by licensed couriers.
According to a news release, the CCD has been accepting manufacturing and retail license applications through its online licensing system and has received more than 300 submitted applications total across all industry sectors.
“Our dedicated team of professionals is working hard through the holidays and… every day to work with applicants to get licenses issued and businesses up and running,” Thomson said. “Standing up a thriving new industry is no small feat, and I know that our team, our system and New Mexico’s prospective licensees are up to the challenge. New Mexico will be ready for adult-use sales in 2022.”
Manufacturers are also prohibited from adding nicotine or caffeine to cannabis products under the final rules, but naturally-occuring caffeine is tolerated. Manufacturing licenses are divided into four classes:
Once retail sales begin on April 1, 2022, customers ages 21 and over, and people 18 and over who possess a valid qualified patient, primary caregiver or reciprocal participant registry identification card, will be allowed inside.
Retailers can take cannabis out of the packaging to display for customers, but the displayed product cannot be sold or consumed, and it must be destroyed. Retailers are also prohibited from providing free samples. Many other restrictions apply.
The maximum retail value of products that a courier can carry is $10,000, and couriers are not allowed to carry packages for delivery for more than 24 hours. Delivery recipients will have their identity Delivery recipients must either over 21 or older, or be 18 or older as a qualified medical cannabis patient or primary caregiver, and must be pre-verified electronically before a courier delivers cannabis.
The full list of final rules can be found on the New Mexico Commission of Public Records.
The New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department had issued a license to the first company, Mother’s Meds, to operate as a cannabis cultivator on November 1.
Deadlines were tight, but the state’s leadership pulled together. The final rules are in place four months ahead of the plan for adult-use cannabis sales. Under the Cannabis Regulation Act, which was passed earlier this year, cannabis industry rules need to be in place by January 1, 2022, and adult-use cannabis sales will start by April 1, 2022.
The post New Mexico Releases Final Adult-Use Cannabis Rules appeared first on High Times.
2021 was full of excellent televlsion series and documentaries. Find out the best strains to pair with the best 2021 streaming shows
The post 12 strains to pair with 2021’s best streaming shows and movies appeared first on Leafly.
When the calendar flips to 2022 in a few days, most job applicants in Philadelphia will no longer have to sweat out a drug test for cannabis.
As of January 1, the city will prohibit most employers from conducting a cannabis drug test for new hires. The new ordinance, passed easily by the Philadelphia city council earlier this year, will be “the first of its kind in Pennsylvania,” according to local television station KDKA.
Recreational pot is still illegal in the state, but medical cannabis is not. The latter was the impetus for Philadelphia City Councilmember Derek Green to author the ordinance, telling KDKA that his chief focus was on medicinal cannabis.
“Cannabis is a unique product. Unlike alcohol and others, it metabolizes in your system a lot differently,” Green said, as quoted by the television station. “We’re having this conversation across the commonwealth and in the general assembly about whether we allow adult-use cannabis. But for me, those who really need medical marijuana, especially to improve their quality of life, shouldn’t be restricted from getting a job because that’s what we all want to see.”
There are a number of exemptions for the new ordinance, “including law enforcement, employees who need a commercial driver’s license, many health-care workers, and a broad category that includes ‘any position in which the employee could significantly impact the health or safety of other employees or members of the public,’” according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.
The city council approved the ordinance in April by a 15-1 vote, with the lone vote against coming from David Oh, a Republican.
The legislation was signed into law by Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney shortly thereafter.
While Philadelphia may be the first city in the Keystone State to enact such a measure, it has been done elsewhere—including in nearby New York City, which had its own ban on pre-employment cannabis drug testing go into effect last year.
Lawmakers in Nevada, where recreational pot is legal for adults, implemented its own ban last year, and earlier this year, not long after it ended prohibition on pot, New York made the ban statewide.
Much like in Philadelphia, New York City’s ban on pre-employment marijuana drug testing came before recreational pot was made legal.
The measure passed the New York City council in 201 after it was brought by Jumaane Williams, the city’s public advocate and a candidate for governor of New York.
“Marijuana testing isn’t a deterrent to using the drug, it’s an impediment to opportunity dating back to the Reagan area—one that disadvantages low-income workers, often workers of more color, many of whom we now call essential but treat as expendable.” Williams said after the ordinance took effect last year.
“Particularly now, as we are grappling with how to recover from the economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the worst levels of unemployment in a century, we need to be creating more access points for employment, not less—and if prospective employers aren’t testing for past alcohol usage, marijuana should be no different. This is an economic recovery issue, a worker justice issue, and one that New York City must lead the way on.”
Green, the Philadelphia city councilmember, said that it didn’t make sense for employers to screen for something that is often recommended by doctors in the state.
“We’re using pre-employment testing for a product that is being recommended by physicians, for individuals within the city of Philadelphia, that’s authorized for them to be used,” Green said after it was approved in April, as quoted by the Philadelphia Inquirer. “That seems very contradictory.”
The post Cannabis Testing Prohibited for Most Philadelphia Job Applicants Starting 2022 appeared first on High Times.
Every considered growing your own? It's easier than you might think to get started with some help from Homegrown Cannabis Co.
The post Why you should start growing your own cannabis with Homegrown Cannabis Co. appeared first on Leafly.
The Psychedelics Law Blog is a forum for discussing and analyzing the impact of psychedelics laws and reform on industry stakeholders, including health care operators, entrepreneurs, investors, regulators, advocates and others.
On this new blog, we will continue to cover the psychedelics law and policy issues we have covered here on the Canna Law Blog for several years now. But all of that content will have a new and permanent home.
Most observers know that psychedelics legal reform is moving quickly in the United States and even internationally. We want our readers to be able to use our content to their advantage, in order to keep current in this ever-changing landscape.
To stay up to date on psychedelics and legal reform, including everything from decriminalization to licensing, make sure you subscribe to this new blog and also follow us on social media:
We plan to publish frequently in 2022 and going forward. Happy new year!
The post Announcing the Psychedelics Law Blog! appeared first on Harris Bricken.
Recreational weed stores open on Jan. 1, 2022. Find the store nearest you on New Year's Day and join the celebration.
The post How to find Montana’s open adult-use cannabis stores appeared first on Leafly.
1 year. 10 states. 16 cannabis contests. Shop the winners today.
The post Cannabis Cup 2021 winners and where to buy them appeared first on Leafly.
As the world contemplates a whole new year, whether or not COVID will finally recede, there are a few things to cheer about, including cannabis reform. Namely, no matter how many uncertainties face us all, as grey January stretches beyond the holiday lights, there is certainly cheer in the air that will last much longer than the season.
Indeed, there are plenty in Germany right now who are already making plans for infused Weihnacht treats just a few years hence. It is now clear that cannabis will take its place quickly in German traditions, Christmas being just one of them. Canna-Glüwein (hot, mulled wine), anyone?
Beyond this, the rest of the EU now teetering on the edge on this issue, has now woken up to the reality that no matter what they decide to do (Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Malta and, of course, the current laggard, France), now that Germany has just uttered the declaration that is the beginning of the end. If not an inevitable form of economic development and tax money in a world starved of the same.
Cannabis has turned a major corner in Europe in 2021. Here are the major hallmarks of the year.
Germany’s new “Traffic Light” political coalition has promised to address the issue of recreational reform legislatively in 2022. Unlike the U.S. where multiple attempts to pass federal cannabis reform have failed, this is likely to happen.
In the initial rollout of reform, however, do not be surprised if the Germans decide to follow the Swiss and allow regular pharmacies to be the first port of call for both medical and recreational users. It would solve several issues at once—starting with the establishment of tight restrictions on cultivation and retail supply chain.
A short term, interim solution such as this will knock out a far more contentious issue—how to structure a licensing system for everything from cultivation in the country (and by whom) to specialty shops that resemble American or Canadian “dispensaries.” Namely not medical establishments. Plus, online sales.
This is for both Germany and cannabis reform, expect there to be several iterations of reform, starting with state and city experiments that will inevitably see Berlin, Bremen, Dortmund, Frankfurt, Dusseldorf, Cologne and Munich on the front lines (because such ideas have been avidly pushed on a municipal level before).
Also, don’t forget that it basically took four years after the law changed and two after the cultivation bid was finally awarded, for there to be distribution of German cultivated medical cannabis. Don’t expect the details of recreational to be handled or hammered out much more quickly. See Canada.
In the meantime, however, full decrim will become the law of the land, and patients will be free of prosecution, both for possession and presumably (hopefully) reasonable home growing. Despite the reluctance to actually have cannabis cultivated in the country, either by patients or companies (see the drama over the first cultivation bid), this is not 2017. Germans, albeit grudgingly, now admit that the drug does work, as a drug, even if they are not yet of one voice in the majority that cannabis prohibition has of course, failed.
Regardless, German recreational, just as medical reform was before it, is a huge, huge step which will drive other countries across the region forward too.
It is a sign of how convoluted the Dutch situation is, if not national position, generally, that the island of Malta led the way on actual, formal, federal, recreational cannabis reform within the European Union (EU). Indeed, if there are analogies to be made, Holland is kind of like the European California—creating a market that exists in the grey areas but is only now facing a discussion (and further one far from complete) about how to federally regulate the industry.
Luxembourg also, it appears, was just hanging back until another country took the leap, despite promising the same in 2018 as a new coalition government took the reins there. Now there is no excuse for any more delays.
Portugal will also inevitably now enact reform as soon as the smoke from the general election early next year clears—and no matter who wins. The country needs an economic boost—either from tourism or exports, and this is a natural solution.
Beyond this, Spain may well follow a Dutch model to formalize production for its clubs rather than coffee shops in the next 12 to 24 months.
Also expect to see Austria, Italy, the Czech Republic, Greece and potentially outliers like Belgium begin to move with the herd, even if in the creation of experimental markets. This may or may not start to happen next year, but it will most certainly catch on within the next 24 months.
Do not forget, of course, that the Swiss began preparing for a recreational trial rollout that now has a calendar date set for actual lift off in 2022. Companies have been submitting and obtaining approvals for the last eight months or so.
The beginning of this market, with its own strange requirements and rules, will also inevitably drive discussions and the shape of reform just across the DACH if not other EU borders the country shares with other countries. Everyone will be watching what goes down in Der Schweitz—including the unique waiving and blending of certain kinds of certifications—including but not limited to Novel Food and GMP.
Try as they might to get some respect, the British cannabis industry, such as it is, has weathered difficult times, and these do not seem at least for now, to be ending any time soon.
In contrast to the British on both European membership and cannabis reform, North Macedonia will inevitably play a role in the immediate future, even if just as a source of cheaper flower and oil extracts.
Poland is also still teetering on the brink of actual if not accessible medical reform, but expect this now also to speed up.
The year 2021 was notable for another reason. Feeder markets will target EU if not Germany at their founder’s mandate, continued to grow. This means that no matter what happens with future cultivation discussions, in any country, starting with Germany, there will be no shortage of other certified cannabis from countries all over the globe at this point, looking for a German home.
For this reason, there will be significant downward pressure on both the medical and “other” flower and biomass discussions.
If there is an analogy to be made, the situation in Europe now on the ground looks a great deal like the conversation in the U.S. in 2012, post presidential election that returned Obama to his second term in office. Namely, two states, Colorado and Washington State, voted on state mandates to create state markets. They both bloomed in 2014—and the rest, as they say, is history.
The developments this year in Europe, and even some of the stuttering delays, no matter their cause or ultimate resolutions, resemble this period, in many ways. And that spells great news for the industry, on all fronts.
The post 2021 Roundup of Cannabis Reform in Europe (and 2022 Predictions) appeared first on High Times.
One of New York’s largest cities could put cannabis tax revenue to work by helping to implement reparations for impoverished communities impacted by the War on Drugs.
First reported by Business Insider, Rochester, New York’s Mayor-Elect Malik Evans plans to fuel his city’s progressive Guaranteed Basic Income (GBI) program with revenue from adult-use cannabis sales, once the state gives the green light to retail sales.
Two weeks ago, Rochester City Council approved a plan for GBI—largely spearheaded by Mayor-Elect Evans following the departure of former Mayor Lovely Warren. The two-year pilot program will provide $500 per month to 175 families that qualify. To qualify, families must live at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty line. They will receive the monthly payment for the span of one year. In recent events, city leadership explained the difference between GBI and Universal Basic Income (UBI).
An additional 175 other families would receive the payments for the second year of the program.
Rochester joins Ithaca, New York to launch a similar basic income program. Programs also already exist in Newark, New Jersey and Los Angeles, California.
The idea to divert cannabis tax revenue to fund guaranteed basic income shows the connection between two problems.
“Community folks told me, ‘this is a big source of revenue, and Black and brown people are prosecuted worse than others because of marijuana,'” Evans told Business Insider. An often-cited American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) report identifies the double standard that stains American’s justice system—Black people are 3.64 times more likely than white people to be arrested for cannabis possession, despite nearly equal rates of usage. Rochester specifically needs improvement, as 34 percent of Black residents in the city fall into poverty compared to eight percent of white ones.
Rochester’s GBI program will receive funding from President Joe Biden’s American Rescue Plan (ARP), which several cities around the U.S. have used to launch GBI programs. Some programs that launched this year are either using ARP funds, grants from former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey or state funds to help low income residents.
Before he assumes the role of Mayor, Evans served as the Rochester City Council’s councilmember-at-large with an extensive background in education and community projects.
“This is an industry with the potential to make millions of dollars,” Evans said. “Everyone wants to start a marijuana business in Rochester.”
To prepare for the eventual rollout of cannabis tax revenue, Evans launched the Rochester Cannabis Preparation Commission last week, so that the city can stay one step ahead, building on the plan of Evans’ predecessor former Mayor Warren.
On March 31, New York legalized adult-use cannabis when former Governor Andrew Cuomo signed legislation, after several years of false starts and other failed efforts.
In a statement, Cuomo called it “a historic day in New York—one that rights the wrongs of the past by putting an end to harsh prison sentences, embraces an industry that will grow the Empire State’s economy, and prioritizes marginalized communities so those that have suffered the most will be the first to reap the benefits.”
Unfortunately, regulation for the sale of cannabis has not yet been finalized, so dispensaries won’t start collecting money for Rochester until those details have been ironed out at the state level first.
Mayor-Elect Evans also plans to ensure an inclusive industry in Rochester. “We’ll have to figure out how we go about setting up our program to make sure we can help entrepreneurs who may not have been involved in the [cannabis industry] in the past,” Evans said.
Cities and towns in New York have until December 31 to opt out of cannabis retail or consumption spaces. Over 400 towns across New York have blocked dispensaries already. Rochester is one of just four municipalities in Monroe County to give the green light.
The post Rochester, New York Mayor-Elect Plans Guaranteed Basic Income From Cannabis Taxes appeared first on High Times.
The state of Maine is determined to preserve its requirement that cannabis businesses be owned by its own residents, bringing the dispute into uncharted legal territory.
First, some background. Officials in the Pine Tree State “originally required all medical and recreational cannabis businesses to be owned by residents,” as the Portland Press Herald explained in an article.
But that requirement was challenged last year by Wellness Connection of Maine, the state’s largest chain of medical cannabis dispensaries that had sought a license for a recreational cannabis dispensary in Portland, the capital city of Maine.
Wellness Connection, which is owned by a Delaware-based LLC, filed a lawsuit against the city of Portland after council members there approved an ordinance capping the number of licenses for adult pot use dispensaries and establishing a system that gave preferential treatment to local applications.
Matt Warner, an attorney for Wellness Connection, argued that the requirement was unconstitutional, saying that as “a matter of constitutional law, states and cities can’t discriminate against citizens of other states based purely on residency.”
“More than 25 percent of the points awarded through Portland’s competitive licensing process are based on residency, so we’re automatically disqualified for those points, based purely on our owner being from Delaware,” Warner said at the time.
The company argued in its filing that limiting “the opportunities for (Wellness Connection) to create a brand, build a reputation and establish customer loyalty in Portland at the adult-use market’s inception would harm them in ways that cannot be reduced to a monetary damages award.”
The state stood down, eventually doing away with the requirement for recreational cannabis businesses, and in August, a federal court sided with Wellness Connection in a ruling that overturned the in-state residency requirement for medical marijuana dispensaries.
That decision, from U.S. District Court Judge Nancy Torresen, has set the stage for the latest round in the dispute between the state and Wellness Connection, with Maine seeking to uphold its requirement that medical dispensaries be owned by residents.
The Press Herald reported that it “appears the case is the first of its kind to reach a federal appeals court, where the opinion could have ramifications in other states,” with the central question hovering over “whether the residency rule violates the U.S. Constitution by restricting interstate commerce.”
In her ruling back in August, Torresen said that the “notion that the medical marijuana industry in Maine is wholly intrastate does not square with reality.”
“I recognize that none of the courts that have confronted this specific constitutional issue have rendered final judgments, and it also seems that no circuit court has addressed it,” the judge wrote, as quoted by the Press Herald.
“But given the Supreme Court’s and First Circuit’s unmistakable antagonism towards state laws that explicitly discriminate against nonresident economic actors, I conclude that the Dispensary Residency Requirement violates the dormant Commerce Clause.”
The appeal has been filed by both the state of Maine and a nonprofit industry group called the Maine Cannabis Coalition, which is in favor of the residency requirement.
In briefs filed in the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the state says that “the dormant Commerce Clause does not apply to Maine’s intrastate market for medical marijuana.”
“Nor do the residency requirements in the Maine Medical Use of Marijuana Act burden interstate commerce more severely than Congress, because Congress has already eliminated that market,” the brief said, as quoted by the Press Herald. “Because striking down Maine’s residency requirements at issue in this case would do nothing to expand legal interstate commerce in the United States, they should stand.”
The post Maine Aims to Disallow Out-of-town Cannabis Business Owners appeared first on High Times.
Precise temperature control and a streamlined design make the AUXO Cira ideal for stoners with high standards.
The post Finally, an e-rig with total temperature control appeared first on Leafly.
Vapes. E-cigarettes. Mexico! Like a lot of people, my brother-in-law is trying to quit smoking. And like a lot of people, he’s not having much success. Which is why a few weeks ago I was sitting in the dining room of a hotel in Florida and he was standing outside on the balcony, sucking on an e-cigarette.
We had flown in a few days before, and my brother-in-law was delighted/not delighted to discover how easy it is to buy vaping supplies compared with Mexico. But luckily/unluckily for him, the situation in Mexico is expected to change. And soon.
In a recent (October) Contradiction of Precedent (Contradicción de Tesis), the Mexican Supreme Court ruled that the blanket prohibition in the Mexico’s General Law for Tobacco Control (LGTC) to “trade, sell, distribute, display, promote or produce any object that is not a tobacco product, which contains any of the elements of the brand or any type of design or auditory signal that identifies it with tobacco products” is unconstitutional.
Sounds good, right? But the ruling did not expressly allow for the commercialization of vapes and e-cigarettes. In theory, it is still not possible to conduct any related activity or benefit from export-oriented government programs by manufacturing those products in Mexico.
The fact that the ruling is binding case law (jurisprudencia), however, means that every lower federal court is mandated to at least consider the ruling when deciding a case where it is claimed that government acts are hindering conduct of activities provided for in the LGCT. Companies and individuals seeking permission via the courts to conduct commercial activities in this area now have an additional – and powerful – weapon in their legal arsenal.
Vapes and e-cigarettes have not had it easy. In 2018, the Federal Commission for the Protection against Sanitary Risks (COFEPRIS) determined that electronic cigarettes fell under the scope of the blanket prohibition described above. Then, a 2020 Executive Order prohibited the importation of goods falling under three newly created tariff classifications, applicable among others to:
This ruling demolished the vaping industry in Mexico, not least because the Court also prohibited the production (i.e. manufacturing) in Mexican territory of vapes, e-cigarettes and similar products. All this is poised to change with October’s ruling.
For companies interested in the Mexico market, we suggest expanding to local manufacturing in Mexico as regulation progresses. Because the sale of vapes, e-cigarettes and similar products is now not unconstitutional, individuals (or their lawyers) can force COFEPRIS to respond to applications or justify rejections by filing amparo actions. Such actions will include a request to federal courts to allow individual activities pending a ruling. We see several avenues of argument, and we note that, as far as we know, every amparo that has been filed to date in this area has been resolved in favor of the plaintiff.
Just as with cannabis in Mexico, the more amparo actions that are successfully pursued by industry stakeholders, the more the Ministry of Health (in charge of regulating vape liquids), the Ministry of Economy (in charge of providing the minimum requirements to import the products), and Congress will feel political pressure. These bodies will have to accommodate an industry for which there is unquestioned demand (and a significant black market).
Stay tuned for further developments!
The post Vapes and E-cigarettes in Mexico appeared first on Harris Bricken.
The Texas Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case challenging the state’s ban on smokable hemp and has scheduled oral arguments for early next year.
After hemp was legalized at the federal level through the 2018 Farm Bill, the following year, Texas state lawmakers approved legislation that bans the manufacturing of smokable hemp products. Often rich in CBD and other cannabinoids, smokable forms of hemp have become popular with consumers, particularly in states without other forms of legal cannabis.
In 2020, four hemp businesses filed a lawsuit in Travis County District Court against the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS), the agency responsible for regulating consumable hemp in the state, and its commissioner, John Hellerstedt. Judge Lora Livingston of the 261st District Court ruled in August that the ban on smokable hemp is unconstitutional and issued a permanent injunction barring the DSHS from enforcing its provisions.
“Based on the entire record in this case, the Court concludes that Texas Health and Safety Code Section 443.204(4) is not rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest,” Livingston wrote in her final judgment.
“In addition, based on the entire record in this case, the real-world effect of Texas Health and Safety Code Section 443.204(4) is so burdensome as to be oppressive in light of any legitimate government interest,” Livingston continued in her ruling.
Zachary Maxwell, the president of Texas Hemp Growers, applauded Livingston’s ruling after the judge struck down the ban.
“Today’s ruling is a major win for Texas’ hemp industry, and may set a new standard in similar cases across the country,” Maxwell said in a press release at the time. “The attorneys behind the Texas Hemp Legal Defense Fund fought hard, brought fact-based arguments to the courtroom and proved the undeniable financial harm caused by this cavalier ban.”
On December 3, the DSHS appealed the judge’s ruling to the Texas Supreme Court, asserting that the high court has jurisdiction in the civil case. On December 17, the high court agreed to hear the case, scheduling arguments for March 22, 2022.
The plaintiffs in the suit against DSHS, four hemp companies led primarily by Crown Distributing, argue that the smokable hemp ban is unconstitutional, writing that “the regulation at issue shuts out hemp businesses from manufacturing and processing a good that is legal.” They also argue that the DSHS has interpreted the law too strictly by banning the sale of smokable hemp, noting that the regulations only prohibit the “processing or manufacturing” of such products.
“In June 2019, Governor Abbott signed legislation establishing a hemp program for Texas. Among other things, it directs the executive commissioner of DSHS to prohibit ‘the processing or manufacturing of a consumable hemp product.’ The Rule DSHS later adopted in 2020, however, went much further: The Rule prohibits the ‘manufacture, processing, distribution, or retail sale of consumable hemp products for smoking,’” the companies wrote in court documents.
After the ban on smokable went into effect in 2020, Sam Alvez, the manager of the 7th Heaven Smoke Shop in Killeen, Texas, told local media that his patrons use smokable hemp therapeutically.
“Our customers always tell us how much CBD changes their lives,” Alvez said. “They sleep better; their knees don’t hurt—they’re taking medicine away, that’s what they’re doing.”
With the ban, he noted, a sizable portion of his revenue was put at risk.
“This is likely to cut our business by 50 percent maybe—we’re looking at a good 50 percent. I personally don’t think they know what they’re doing,” referring to Texas lawmakers. “They legalized it, but now they’re taking it back. I don’t understand that part of it.”
The post Texas Supreme Court Takes Case Challenging Smokable Hemp Ban appeared first on High Times.
In the last two months New York Senator Jeremy Cooney has introduced two pieces of cannabis legislation that could impact New York’s cannabis industry significantly. The first is Senate Bill S7517A, which expands the definition of social and economic equity applicant under the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act (MRTA) to include gender equality. The second is Senate Bill S7518 to permit tax deductions for commercial cannabis activities. Let’s go through them both in detail:
This bill expands the list of qualifying social and economic equity applicants to include “transgender, gender non-conforming and non-binary individuals.” The bill defines “transgender, gender non-conforming and non-binary individuals” as “any person who has a gender identity or expression different from the sex assigned to that individual at birth.”
Senator Cooney has repeatedly spoken about the importance of expanding qualified social and economic applicants to include transgender, gender non-conforming and non-binary individuals. The justification for the legislation explains why:
“Every New Yorker deserves the right to express and identify their gender as they choose. An unintended consequence of [the MRTA] would force certain individuals from choosing between their gender identity and receiving priority for a license. The social equity aspect of the MRTA is meant to uplift historically marginalized groups through economic opportunities in the cannabis industry and this bill furthers that effort.”
The language of this bill is pretty straightforward: the prohibition on deducting expenses in connection with the illegal sale of drugs shall not apply to a licensee under the MRTA. The bill expressly lists each of the license types and incorporates by references the definition of “licensee” under the MRTA. Other cannabis friendly states have passed similar tax deduction laws.
The text of the proposed bill references the underlying Federal tax law upon which the prohibition is (was) based: Section 208E of the Internal Revenue Code. We have written extensively on the subject (e.g. here, here, here, here and here). The short of it is that a cannabis business cannot deduct or credit any amount paid or incurred as part of operating its business, outside of what can be captured in “costs of good sold.”
The impact of S7518 would be significant. By allowing cannabis businesses to deduct their operating expenses at the state level, the legislation would allow them to operate like legitimate business in New York. (Note: this legislation would not change Federal tax law).
The bill’s justification section highlights two of the goals in passing the MRTA: the promotion of social equity and a competitive business environment. As stated in the justification section:
It is important to note that neither S7517A nor S7518 are law. But the justifications for both pieces of legislation are sound. Stay tuned for further developments in New York cannabis industry, legislative or otherwise!
The post New York Cannabis Legislation: Expanded Social Equity and Tax Deductions appeared first on Harris Bricken.
Here’s a scenario our cannabis lawyers and litigation team have experienced countless times: A client calls and wants to take immediate action for breach of a cannabis contract. They want to terminate the contract. Or evict a tenant. Or file a lawsuit. The first question I always ask these clients is whether the contract contains any notice and cure provisions. In almost all cases, the answer will make things more complicated.
“Notice and cure” is a legal term of art that can be really difficult for laypeople to wrap their heads around. It means that a party is not in breach of a contract until they:
This can throw a lot of non-lawyers off because it’s not often consistent with reality. If a contract says that one party can’t do X and they do X, they are in breach, at least according to normal conceptions of what it means to breach.
But the law has evolved over time to make going to court, kicking tenants out, and awarding damages the absolute last measure where possible. So what that means in practice is that parties often get the chance to fix their wrongdoing.
Good notice and cure terms require written notice. Not doing so can lead to all kinds of crazy scenarios where one party claims it gave notice by phone or in person, which is impossible to actually prove definitively.
The noticing party always has to provide a minimum level of detail for notice to have any meaningful effect. Imagine the other party to your contract said “you’re in breach of section X, fix it in 5 days or I’ll sue.” How could you know what you allegedly did wrong, let alone comply? That kind of notice is not legally effective and could lead to a host of issues. Beyond the minimum notice thresholds though, some notice and cure provisions require the noticing party to provide a specific and detailed information.
Contracts almost always contain detailed notice procedures in the miscellaneous section. They can allow notice by mail, in-person, by fax, by email, or whatever other way the parties like. A lot of folks just gloss over these terms when reviewing a contract, and some even skip them when analyzing a notice and cure provision after a breach. These are both bad ideas. It’s good to be very aware of how notice will be given if a dispute arises. Sometimes, contracts also fail to include notice terms (also bad!), which can make the process for notice much more complicated.
If there’s no notice and cure provision, there’s generally no chance to cure. If the parties want to have a cure period, they have to define the length of it otherwise it’ll be perpetual. Contracts often have different cure periods for different breaches. Rent or other payment obligations usually have tight cure periods, and non-financial breaches usually have longer ones. That’s because paying money and curing is a lot easier to do than fixing the consequences of failing to act. In some cases there may not even be a cure period – it is completely up to the parties. And depending on the type of contract and type of breach, the “market” cure period length can be very different.
After getting notice, a party can either try to cure or not (more on that below). Curing a financial breach is pretty easy procedurally: you pay money. But curing a non-financial breach can be complicated. If the other side says you breached a property lease by failing to meet certain tenant improvement benchmarks, that can be a challenge to meet. If a notice and cure term does not give the breaching party enough time to cure, a common tactic is to commence curing and reach out to the other side to get more time. Some notice and cure provisions even let parties that commence curing within a cure period and finish the cure as quickly as possible off the hook.
If a party does not cure in time or at all, it is in breach or default. That allows the other side to exercise whatever remedy it has available under the contract or at law – termination, eviction, damage claims, etc. Once that happens, a party that tries to cure too late will be out of luck contractually. If a party cured a little late and was still hauled to court, a judge or jury may be sympathetic and deny the other side relief. But sympathy from a court or jury is never something anyone should hang their hat on.
Most of the time, a party that gets a notice of breach or default does not agree with it. They claim it’s a lie. Or that it’s wrong. Or that they actually didn’t have to comply because the other side breached first. The list goes on.
In any case, once a termination letter comes in, the clock starts ticking. Some contracts may allow a party to pay a disputed amount under protest. In other cases, a party could sue. Or it could reach out to the noticing party and try to negotiate or explain why their position is false. The possibilities are many, and it depends on the facts.
Notice and cure provisions are complicated, but essential. Our lawyers have seen too many situations where parties in pre-dispute mode have botched the notice and cure process, or where they failed to think notice and cure provisions through when drafting a contract. Either way, bad things can happen and a lot of money can be unnecessarily spent.
The post Notice and Cure Provisions appeared first on Harris Bricken.
Wishing all of our readers, along with friends and families, the very best this holiday season.
Whether you celebrate Hanukkah, Christmas, Kwanzaa, Winter Solstice, Festivus, or something else, we hope you can kick back and enjoy this wonderful time of the year.
Happy holidays!
The post Happy Holidays from Canna Law Blog! appeared first on Harris Bricken.
On December 8th, Harris Bricken teamed up with international law firm Clifford Chance to analyze and discuss the latest trends in global cannabis. The discussion covered commercial cannabis and cannabis-based products in the key markets of Africa, Europe, the U.K., the U.S., and Canada.
In case you missed this free event, you can watch the replays below:
Interested in buying or selling a cannabis business? Register for Harris Bricken’s upcoming FREE webinar,Corporate Cannabis Q&A: Buying and Selling a Cannabis Business, taking place on Thursday, January 13th at 3pm EST/12pm PST.
The post Webinar Replay – Cannabis: A Global New High appeared first on Harris Bricken.
