Sisley contra DEA: marihuana, cannabis

Sisley contra la DEA: se ha presentado una petición de nueva audiencia.

In follow-up to this post, we are happy to report that Dr. Sisley is still fighting the good fight: on Monday, Petitioners filed a Petition for Panel Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc. Although it’s not uncommon for these to get filed, few and far in between are granted (filing such a petition to rehash the

minnesotahempdeltathccbd

Cannabis en Minnesota: El Tribunal de Apelación dictamina que los cannabinoides derivados del cáñamo en forma líquida (¡pero no en forma de hojas!) son ilegales.

We don’t write about criminal cases often, but a recent decision from the Minnesota Court of Appeals caught my eye because of its potential impact on the people of Minnesota and businesses engaged in processing, manufacturing, possession, or selling of Hemp/CBD in Minnesota. This ruling affects manufacturers, processors, sellers, distributors, and consumers of any liquid

sisley dea cannabis marijuana reschedule

El fin del desafío de Sisley a la DEA

Well, it’s over (for now) for Suzanne Sisley. As we covered last year, Sisley, et al. v. U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, et al., Case No. 20-71433, was an appellate case filed by a group of scientists and veterans that had sued the DEA in May 2020. They, like so many others, argued that the DEA’s

cannabis, marihuana, quiebra

Quiebra por cannabis 101

En una entrada anterior, analizamos algunas de las tendencias emergentes entre las empresas del sector del cannabis que solicitan la protección por quiebra (haz clic aquí para ver la entrada anterior). Pero, en primer lugar, la pregunta es: ¿puede una empresa del sector del cannabis solicitar la protección por quiebra? En esta entrada analizaremos la primera resolución dictada en Arizona en el caso de

A man and woman in a courtroom.

El perito experto en cannabis

For the past few years, I have been engaged as an expert witness on a series of cannabis litigation matters here in Oregon. The way litigants use experts varies across jurisdictions due to local rules of evidence and other factors, but in any jurisdiction, compelling expert testimony can make or break a case. In this

Smokable Hemp Texas

Cáñamo para fumar: Las empresas de cáñamo obtienen un éxito parcial en su impugnación de la prohibición del cáñamo para fumar

Just a few days ago the Texas Court of Appeals published an opinion concerning smokable hemp. Before getting into the ruling, let’s review what happened in Texas after enactment of the 2018 Farm Bill. In 2019, the Texas Legislature enacted statutory provisions regulating certain hemp products. Among the statutes was a law prohibiting any state

oregon cannabis litigation oda

Oregon Hemp: Un cultivador demanda a la ODA por no expedir registros y solicita una orden de restricción contra el sheriff.

A hemp grower in Jackson County, Oregon has filed suit against the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) over failure to issue hemp registrations and against the Jackson County Sheriff to prevent the destruction of its hemp. We’ve written on about the difficulties hemp farmers face when law enforcement seeks to destroy, or does destroy, a

Litigios en Estados Unidos

Litigio sobre cannabis: fracasa el intento de alegar la defensa de «ilegalidad»

As the country moves toward decriminalizing and even legalizing marijuana, federal courts largely remain closed to commercial disputes involving marijuana by operation of the illegality defense.  We’ve written about the defense on several occasions, see here and here. Briefly, the illegality defense is an affirmative defense pleaded by a defendant who has been sued for

Establecimiento vinculado a la LCB de Washington

El Tribunal de Apelaciones de Washington revoca la interpretación de la LCB de la norma «Tied House» (establecimiento vinculado)

El estado de Washington regula estrictamente las relaciones entre los productores y procesadores de marihuana, por un lado, y los minoristas de marihuana, por otro. Muchos estados permiten que las mismas personas tengan intereses económicos en los tres tipos de licencias. Pero no es el caso de Washington. Según el artículo 69.50.328 del Código Revisado de Washington (RCW), ni un productor de marihuana con licencia ni un procesador de marihuana con licencia

Suscríbete a nuestro blog

Descubre las últimas noticias y análisis jurídicos sobre China, el cannabis, el derecho internacional, la inmigración, la resolución de conflictos y la Web3.