Everyone has their own unique set of ‘rules’ when it comes to getting higher than high. We’ve all tried all manner of weird and wonderful things to feel a bigger buzz – some of which turn out to be more successful than others. But then there are those standards that are followed instinctively by millions […]
On January 1, 2019, the City of Pasadena in Northeastern Los Angeles County will open up its 30-day window to apply for one of six retail, four cultivation, or four testing facility permits. These 14 licenses will be highly coveted and sought after, and the winners will not be derived from a lottery system, but selected instead on scored applications. For anyone looking to get licensed in Pasadena, it’s going to be a busy month and an uphill battle.
Licensing in Pasadena is based on the June 2018 approval of local ballot measures CC and DD, which allow these limited permits and establish local taxing regimes. These ballot measures set hard caps on the license types as noted above. Unless Pasadena elects to allow more license types or licenses at later dates, this one-month window will be the only time to apply for commercial cannabis licenses in this city. And where the majority of California cities and counties still ban commercial cannabis activity, having Pasadena come online is a big win for overall legalization.
Notably, section 17.50.66 of the Pasadena Municipal Code precludes businesses from being licensed within the same building or even within 500–1,000 feet of one another, depending on the license type. In other words, Pasadena won’t be allowing combined license types in the same building or even …
Pot by post has been a thing for some time now. Even prior to legalisation across much of the United States, it wasn’t exactly difficult to find somebody somewhere selling cannabis online. Today, buying and selling pot via the web is easier than ever before. Whether on the lookout for Star Tonic or a batch […]
It’s the kind of faux-pas every cannabis newcomer makes at some point or another. You refer to one particular consumption method by entirely the wrong name and find yourself the laughing stock of those who know what they’re talking about. As far as some are concerned, it really doesn’t matter how you hit it…just as […]
When getting started with cannabis cultivation, it can be difficult to balance hydration. In fact, even the most experienced home growers occasionally struggle to get things right. Of all the cannabis cultivation challenges you’re likely to encounter, none are more common than overwatering. It’s exactly the same with most house-plants in general. You know they […]
As we’ve stated time and time again, the cannabis industry is rampant with risks and scams, and can be an ethical minefield for attorneys to navigate. Legalized cannabis is a multi-billion dollar industry, however, and legitimate businesses need good and ethical attorneys to provide legal advice.
This is complicated, because due to federal laws, an attorney providing legal advice to a cannabis business in compliance with state and local laws could technically be aiding and abetting violations of the federal Controlled Substances Act.
Earlier this month, I gave a presentation to California attorneys regarding ethical representation of cannabis businesses and how to navigate the complicated tension between state and federal laws. I was joined by municipal lawyer Ruben Duran, partner with Best Best & Krieger, who advises public agencies.
This post will focus on the ongoing tension between state and federal laws, and the application of California’s new Rules of Professional Conduct. My next post will focus on attorney-client privilege concerns and real life ethical scenarios.
On December 20th, U.S. Tax Court issued its opinion in Alternative Health Care Advocates et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. The long opinion details various issues related to the specific case, but we will concentrate on one relatively small piece of it. How would the Tax Court treat income paid from a marijuana retailer to a management services company for that retailer?
In this case, Alternative Health Care Advocates provided medical marijuana to individuals in California under California law. Another company, Wellness Management Group, Inc., provided management services to Alternative Health Advocates. These services included hiring employees and managing HR for those employees, paying wages for those employees, paying advertising expenses, paying rent, etc. Wellness did not provide services of that nature or any nature to any other business entity. Wellness made money by collecting fees for its services from Alternative Health Care Advocates.
Under Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code, businesses that are engaged in trafficking controlled substances cannot take regular business deductions, so they end up paying taxes on their gross receipts less their allowed cost of goods sold (COGS). If an expense doesn’t fit into the category of COGS, a company that is considered to be “trafficking” would have to pay taxes as if the expense hadn’t been incurred in the first …
Don’t let your lack of knowledge about how to clean a grinder be a deterrent to maintaining your cannabis equipment. There are plenty of good reasons to keep your grinder clean, and it’s really not that difficult when you get the hang of it.
In this article, the experts at Honest Marijuana will show you how to clean a grinder in five easy steps — with no muss and no fuss.
And if a clean tool isn’t motivation enough for you, we’ll show you how to use the leftover plant matter to take your smoke sesh to the next level.
Why You Should Clean Your Grinder
1) Keeps You From Getting Sick
Those nugs of bud we all love were once live plant matter. And even though they’ve been dried and cured, they will eventually start to decompose.
That means bacteria will start to grow on any leftover kief in your grinder. And in case you were absent that day in middle school, bacteria can make you sick. Clean your grinder and stay healthy longer.
2) Ensures The Smooth Operation Of Your Grinder
Periodic cleaning ensures that your grinder will work smoothly when you need it most.
Grinding cannabis is a sticky job, and some of that sticky icky will get stuck in your grinder. That can gum up …
Trimming weed may seem like a daunting activity. But take it from the professionals at Honest Marijuana — it’s not as hard as all that. In fact, it’s pretty simple, and we’re going to teach you how.
In this article, we’ll show you the best way to trim your weed for maximum potency. We’ll even tell you how you can use all the stuff you trim off your bud to make edibles, creams, and other fun stuff.
Why Trimming Weed Is Essential
Trimming weed is essential during the harvesting process because it reduces the harshness of the finished product.
Leaves contain more chlorophyll than the flowers (buds), so they will always feel more acidic in your throat when burned. Getting rid of those leaves will make the buds smoother and easier to smoke.
Trimming weed also improves THC concentration. Leaves, by nature, have a lower concentration of trichomes.
If you leave the leaves on the bud, gram-for-gram there will be fewer trichomes and, as a result, less THC in the finished product. That can affect potency, flavor, and the overall experience of burning down.
How To Trim Your Marijuana Plant
Supplies For Trimming Weed
Disposable rubber gloves (thin latex medical gloves, not the thick dishwashing gloves)
Here we are at the end of 2018, which means it’s time for the third annual “State of the State” post on Oregon cannabis (the 2017 post is here and the 2016 post is here). The year 2018 was truly remarkable in the Oregon industry, and we saw a lot of change, from regulatory evolution to industry consolidation to overall market dynamism. Below is a high-level summary of what we are seeing in the industry as we move into the new year.
Competition is intense.
The marijuana market is saturated with both licensees and product. October is always the peak month for harvest, and the Portland Business Journal, by way of OLCC, reports that producers brought in 2.54 million pounds that month (measured in wet weight). This was a slight increase from 2.48 million harvested pounds in 2017. For the full year, production was running 9% higher than 2017, and wholesale prices fell by more than 50% from mid-2017 to mid-2018. As any store owner will tell you, retail prices have fallen significantly too.
In addition to product saturation in the market, the number of licensees has continued to grow. OLCC issued an additional 300+ producer licenses in 2018, bringing the total number to 1,110. There are also 1,141 additional producers awaiting licensure. With respect to retail, there …
In California, under the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis and Regulation Safety Act (MAUCRSA), temporary licenses began issuing to cannabis businesses on January 1, 2018. Since then, the state agencies in charge of MAUCRSA’s implementation (the Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC), the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), and the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA)) have worked pretty much round the clock on adopting permanent regulations. In case you forgot, the agencies dropped their initial proposed permanent rules this past summer, tweaked those, and then released another round of revised proposed permanent regulations last month (which are now in the hands of the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for an overall review). That last round of proposed permanent rules (see here, here, and here) is very likely to become effective (pending OAL’s review) in early January. Right now, all licensees are still operating under the emergency rules that came out in fall of 2017. And pretty much everyone is racing to get their temporary licenses, which will NOT be available after December 31.
Despite the fact that the state has made great progress towards permanent rules, many questions and ambiguities around licensing and operational conduct remain. In fact, some of the grayer areas of the emergency regulations have been expanded by the proposed permanent rules for …
Medical cannabis has been legal in Canada for almost two decades, but it’s only gained popularity in the last few years. As more research is being conducted, more medical professionals and patients are beginning to explore the possibilities of medicinal treatments with cannabis.
After years of us banging the drum for the WSLCB to change its financier approval process, there is a glimmer of hope out there that the agency is willing to listen to reason. The WSLCB has issued a new interim policy, BIP-06-2018, that allows existing true parties of interest and financiers to get clearance for providing additional funds to licensed marijuana businesses concurrently with contributing the funds.
The problem was that the WSLCB has required pre-approval of any new funding contributed to or spent on behalf of a marijuana licensee. That includes additional funding coming from financiers and true parties of interest that had already been approved by the state. This cumbersome process could take months, and it was creating a significant compliance problem in the state.
In the crowded marijuana business market, companies have needed to run extremely tight margins to stay competitive. Tight margins mean that any bit of bad luck can cause a company to go temporarily into the red. If a company doesn’t have the cash reserves to handle operating expenses in that time, the owners must often dip into their own pockets and fund the difference. But if payroll is due next week, it doesn’t help much that the WSLCB will allow an owner to contribute additional funds three months later. Faced with …
In a move straight out of the 1984 classic “Repo Man,” Washington regulators are making marijuana edibles really, really boring.
Earlier this year, we wrote about the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board’s (WSLCB) decision to effectively ban marijuana-infused candy. The industry pushed back and the WSLCB reevaluated its stance. December 12, the WSLCB issued a new interim policy to “further clarify the procedures and processes for packaging, labeling, and product decisions for marijuana infused edible products.” It lists the following requirements that apply to all marijuana infused edible products and their package and labeling:
Only colors and shapes from an approved list on the WSLCB website can be used.
A white or cream background with brown or black lettering and up to three accent colors from the approved color list will be provided on the WSLCB website.
A percentage or gradient of an approved color counts as one color.
A grey or black background with brown or white lettering and up to three accent colors from the approved color list will be provided on the WSLCB website. A percentage or gradient of an approved color counts as one color.
A tan or brown background with black or white lettering and up to three accent colors from the approved color list provided on the WSLCB website. A percentage
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that finding marijuana stems in a trash bag does not permit the police to search the house for evidence of a crime. From a legal standpoint this case has interesting implications on when, where, and what police can search. From a more practical perspective, it shows the courts, along with the majority of America, are accepting that marijuana is not a dangerous substance.
The case, United State v. Tyrone Lyles, saw Mr. Lyles accused of possessing firearms as a convicted felon. The police of Prince George County (in Maryland, right outside of Washington, D.C.) were investigating Mr. Lyles in an unrelated case. They searched four trash bags on a curb near his house and found three marijuana stems. Based on the marijuana stems, the police obtained a search warrant for Mr. Lyle’s house. In the application for the search warrant the police stated they had found the marijuana stems, rolling papers and based on this believed that there were “controlled dangerous substances, Marijuana, and handguns being stored, used and/or sold” at Mr. Lyles home.
Based on this information, the police were granted a broad warrant and allowed to search Mr. Lyles home in total. The police, during the search, found four handguns, ammunition, marijuana, and …
Yesterday, President Trump signed the 2018 Farm Bill, paving the way for industrial hemp legalization. Within hours, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) Commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, issued a statement clarifying the FDA’s position on industrial hemp.
The FDA’s position: Just because industrial hemp is legal doesn’t mean that you can put it in food or call it medicine.
Gottlieb was quick to point out that even though the Farm Bill modified the Controlled Substances Act, the FDA still retains the authority to “regulate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act” (or “FDCA”). Gottlieb went on to state that the FDA fully intends to exercise that authority:
[I]t’s unlawful under the FD&C Act to introduce food containing added CBD or THC into interstate commerce, or to market CBD or THC products as, or in, dietary supplements, regardless of whether the substances are hemp-derived. This is because both CBD and THC are active ingredients in FDA-approved drugs and were the subject of substantial clinical investigations before they were marketed as foods or dietary supplements. Under the FD&C Act, it’s illegal to introduce drug ingredients like these into the food supply, or to market them as dietary supplements. This is a requirement that we apply across the board to food products that contain
Today the US takes a major step forward in cannabis reform! The 2018 Farm Bill legalizes industrial hemp, and was just signed into law by President Trump. Industrial hemp will now be treated like an agricultural commodity, not a controlled substance. Our in-depth look at the hemp provisions in this new Farm Bill is available here.
Hemp has been booming in popularity these last few years and this latest development is only likely to do accelerate market growth. This is in large part due to the increased interest in cannabidiol (CBD) derived from industrial hemp. With reform comes regulation. We expect the Food and Drug Administration to start reevaluating hemp-derived food products, cosmetics, dietary supplements, and drugs. It may take some time for the FDA to actually approve a hemp-derived product, but that day is coming a lot faster in light of this Bill. You can read more about cannabis and the FDA here:
As this Bill just passed, we plan to watch carefully how things develop. Will businesses selling Hemp-CBD now be able to obtain federal trademark protections? How long until California rethinks it’s much maligned CBD-FAQs? If industrial hemp is going …
2018 has been a roller coaster for California cannabis businesses. The cannabis laws and regulations in California have made life difficult, to say the least, for anyone wishing to obtain licensure. This isn’t necessarily the fault of any single legislature, municipality, or agency, but instead was the result of a perfect storm of legal and non-legal issues.
The beginning of the year saw the opening of adult use licensing under the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulatory and Safety Act (or “MAUCRSA”). Businesses that sought licensure could apply as of January 1, 2018 for an annual application. In theory, this could have been simple, but it turned out to be far more complex than anyone probably intended.
One provision in MAUCRSA that has been the bane of any applicant’s existence is the requirement to have local approval when applying for an annual (or temporary) license. What this means is that applicants couldn’t apply for state and local licenses concurrently; instead, they had to apply for and obtain full local approval first, and then move onto the statewide licensing. Localities have been all over the map in terms of how they process applications, which means that it could take months between finding an eligible parcel of land and even starting the process of applying for state licensing.
With everyone discussing the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill and its implications for the booming cannabidiol (CBD) industry, there is much speculation as to how the legalization of industrial hemp will affect the treatment of CBD by multiple government agencies, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Will the legalization of industrial hemp open the door to federal trademark protection for CBD products? Unfortunately, the answer is not yet clear.
I’ve discussed the “legal use in commerce” requirement for federal trademarks at length in other posts, so I won’t go into too much detail here. But the gist is that in order to procure federal trademark protection for your mark, the goods and/or services for which you are claiming trademark protection must be legal pursuant to federal law. Because the manufacture, distribution and dispensing of cannabis is illegal under the Controlled Substances Act, the lawful use in commerce requirement cannot be met.
But what about CBD? If my CBD products are “legal under federal law,” why can’t I obtain federal trademark protection? Part of the issue that remains, even in light of the legalization of industrial hemp, is that the FDA still says that CBD cannot be sold for human consumption unless it has undergone the agency’s drug approval process. …
The rules governing medical marijuana in Canada are changing on account of the Cannabis Act coming into force on October 17, 2018. Despite recreational cannabis now being legal across the country, medical cannabis remains separate. There are still programs in place to help patients access the medication they need.
But in one of a new set of policies that the WSLCB has issued recently, it has also sought to avoid packaging and labeling reminiscent of products made for adults — alcohol. Under BIP-07-2018, marijuana-infused products must not “Mimic, imply, represent or contain any statement, depiction, illustration, design, brand, or name of a product containing alcohol.”
Further, the WSLCB claims that if a product looks like alcohol, a licensee can’t get its product approved even if it includes a disclaimer on the packaging that the product does not contain alcohol. Even though this is a recent development as a written policy, we know that the WSLCB has been treating this …
It’s undeniable that the cannabis industry has evolved at a dizzying pace over the last decade, with a multitude of new genetics and products that we couldn’t even imagine a few years ago. A clear example of this is the new CMH (Ceramic Metal Halide) technology in illumination for indoor cultivation, also known as LEC (Light Emitting Ceramic). Based on the design of conventional high intensity discharge bulbs, these new lamps are innovative for replacing the quartz used in the familiar metal halide bulbs with a ceramic element, which provides a series of advantages, especially in terms of width of the light spectrum and better use of light, which translates into bigger harvests.
The explanation is simple: CMH LEC lighting systems emit a spectrum of light that is much closer to natural light than any other bulb on the market, with an unrivalled richness in the different wavelengths and that ranges from UV to far red. It is, in a manner of speaking, the perfect artificial light for cultivating plants indoors, increasing photosynthesis and reaching yields of 1.5 grams per watt in the case of cannabis, and with a higher production of terpenes! In addition, and as you will see below, some of the biggest brands in the illumination business already offer their own CMH equipment, which …
The ups, downs, and unknowns around L.A. cannabis licensing have abounded from the passage of Measure M back in March 2017. This is not uncommon, especially in large cities, as regulators determine how to handle things on the fly and as issues arise (see, for example, social equity in L.A. and the ability to re-locate for Existing Medical Marijuana Dispensaries (“EMMDs“). L.A., to its credit, has been transparent and pretty consistent in the way it’s treated licensees and stakeholders. To that end, this month, L.A.’s Department of Cannabis Regulation (“DCR”) released a Phase 2 licensing bulletin that’s significantly important for those Phase 2 would-be licensees that seek a temporary license.
Recall, to qualify for Phase II temporary approval/licensing (which triggered priority licensing for existing “non-retailers” like growers and manufacturers) — folks had to meet all of the following criteria:
Engagement prior to January 1, 2016, in the same Non-Retailer Commercial Cannabis Activity for which it sought a license;
Supplier to an Existing Medical Marijuana Dispensary prior to January 1, 2017;
The Business Premises meet all the land use and sensitive use requirements under cannabis laws and the existing City code;
The applicant’s premises have to pass a pre-license inspection without any fire or life safety violations either;
All outstanding City business tax obligations were paid to the City
MedMen, a popular California cannabis retail company, has been hit with a class action lawsuit from former employees. Class action lawsuits are no joke. These lawsuits involve a few plaintiffs suing on behalf of multiple similarly situated plaintiffs. The claims, money, and other associated costs add up very fast.
In MedMen’s case, two former employees, Chelsea Medlock and Anthony Torres, allege that MedMen failed to pay them for all hours worked, failed to pay overtime wages, failed to provide mandatory meal and rest breaks, and failed to keep accurate records of employees hours worked. Medlock and Torres worsened the blow by bringing the lawsuit as a class action on behalf of all MedMen employees (current and former) from the last four years. If the class is “certified” by the Superior Court of the State of California, where it was filed, the class of plaintiffs could include thousands of employees.
Specifically, Medlock and Torres allege MedMen required them to perform work “off-the-clock” for which they received no pay. Medlock and Torres are seeking minimum wage, liquidated damages, interest and attorney fees for the unpaid time. Although Medlock and Torres have not made specific allegations in the complaint, Starbucks was recently ordered to pay an employee $102.67 for the time the employee spent locking up the store and setting alarms, without …
Last Friday, December 7, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (“ECDD”), was scheduled to make a recommendation about the international legal status of cannabis. The WHO is a “specialized agency” of the United Nations, and the ECCD is a WHO committee consisting of experts in the field of drugs and medicines, that assesses the health risks and benefits of the use of psychoactive substances. Alas, the ECDD announced it would temporarily withhold the results of the assessment until January, declaring it needed additional time “for clearance reasons.”
Earlier this year, the ECDD released a preliminary report (“Pre-Review”) on the effects of the plant, which concluded that cannabis is a “relatively safe drug.” The Pre-Review also revealed that cannabinoids (“CBD”) offer numerous therapeutic benefits, including reduction of pain, promotion of sleep, and improvement of motor function for individuals affected by Parkinson’s disease. As a result, the ECDD made the recommendation to the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs (“CND”), that pure CBD not be scheduled under any international drug treaty.
The Pre-Review results gave us and other reform advocates great hope that a more in-depth review would take place before the ECDD makes a final recommendation to U.N. Secretary António Guterres. Comprehensive scientific data on the effects and benefits of cannabis are hard …
The federal 2018 Farm Bill is likely to become law in the very near future. If it does, it will redefine the hemp industry nationwide. We intend on writing more in the near future as to the specifics of the 2018 Farm Bill, but one interesting question is what effect it will have on California’s industrial hemp and CBD policies.
As anyone in the California hemp business knows, the Department of Public Health (“CDPH”) issued a FAQ policy guideline over the summer which took the position that industrial-hemp derived CBD in food products is unlawful. The FAQ justified this position in part because the federal Controlled Substances Act included industrial hemp as a Schedule I drug, and in part because the federal Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) had concluded that it was unlawful to place THC or CBD into food products.
The 2018 Farm Bill, if it passes, will essentially amend the Controlled Substances Act to take industrial hemp out of the definition of marijuana. In essence, this would make industrial hemp derived products lawful products. The question then is: Will the 2018 Farm Bill negate the FAQ?
The answer is probably not. Even though the Controlled Substances Act may be amended and some of the underlying support for the FAQ may be undermined, that won’t change the fact that …
Running a cannabis business is difficult and many people fail. There are a myriad of reasons why these ventures bottom out, although owners tend to blame federal law issues first of all. It’s true that federal law creates a tough environment for cannabis businesses (banking issues, tax issues, branding issues, etc.), but federal prohibition also kept big money sidelined at first, giving small business a real head start. My personal view, after seeing many spectacular business failures and slow motion crashes over the past several years, is that most are some combination of the following: 1) a challenging legal and regulatory environment, 2) saturated markets, and 3) operator error.
A start-up cannabis business cannot control the first two items listed above, but should be able to navigate them. The third item is a different animal. Margin of error tends to be slim for most new ventures, and self-inflicted wounds are difficult to overcome. This blog post covers the five biggest mistakes we continue to see in early stage Oregon cannabis business, and gives suggestions to avoid them.
Failure to properly estimate license transition timelines
Because the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) “paused” review of applications submitted after June 15, 2018, most new market entrants are buying their way in through asset or stock sales from existing licensees. The …
After a long last, it’s finally happened. The 2018 Farm Bill has made it out of conference and has been approved by the Senate. It currently awaits approval from the House, which is expected this week. If Donald Trump signs the 2018 Farm Bill before the current legislative session ends on December 21, industrial hemp will be legal under U.S. federal law. Though we still are likely a few years out from full marijuana legalization, it appears that 2019 is going to be the “Year of Hemp” if Washington D.C. can make this happen before the deadline. Now, we’ll turn to the long awaited hemp-related text of the 2018 Farm Bill, as agreed to by the House and Senate. A copy of the full 2018 Farm Bill is available, via the U.S. Hemp Roundtable, here.
Some key provisions of the 2014 Farm Bill remain. “Industrial hemp” still means parts of the cannabis plant, whether growing or not, with less than 0.3% THC on a dry weight basis. Cannabis with more than 0.3% is still considered marijuana and is still classified as a schedule I substance. Additionally, the 2014 Farm Bill’s hemp provisions will continue for a year after the 2018 Farm Bill is signed. That means that the agricultural pilot programs that we know and love will stick around …
This past Friday, California’s three agencies charged with writing and enforcing cannabis regulations—the Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC), the Department of Public Health (DPH), and the Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA)—made public their respective proposed final regulations, which are currently pending a 30-day review by the Office of Administrative Law before becoming law. Some of the most significant and controversial changes appear in the BCC’s proposed final regulations, which govern a variety of licensees such as retailers, distributors, testing laboratories, and microbusinesses, and which we will be writing about in the coming days.
As for the DFA, which issues and enforces rules for cannabis cultivators, the proposed final rules are substantially the same as the modifications the agency proposed back in October. While “substantially the same” might sound innocuous, it amounts to acceptance of the October modifications, many of which were significant. Below are some initial takeaways.
Cultivation license “stacking.” It looks like the “stacking” work-around for the acreage cap is going to be permanent. Remember the controversy surrounding the state’s decision not to limit accumulation of small cultivation licenses by a single licensee so as to essentially create a loophole to the 1-acre cap, to the benefit of big farms. However…
Shared facilities limitations. It also looks like the DFA’s proposed modifications regarding …
If you’ve been using medical cannabis for any length of time, you may have wondered how you could maximize the health outcomes of this treatment. Research suggests cannabis could be helpful in the management of many different conditions.
Owning a cannabis business can present formidable challenges. Adhering to the OLCC rules can be complex in and of itself, but your business must also comply with an array of state and federal employment laws and regulations.
If you are an OLCC licensed cannabis business with employees, Harris Bricken employment lawyer Megan Vaniman will present a free webinar tomorrow, December 12, 2018 at 12pm PST to help you better understand these issues. Throughout the presentation, Megan will discuss how to navigate employment law for cannabis businesses, and provide you with tips and tricks to ensure compliance. Topics Include:
What to consider when hiring
Oregon’s sick leave requirements
Oregon and Portland’s “ban-the-box” ordinance
Final pay checks
Independent Contractor vs Employee designation
Moderated by Harris Bricken cannabis attorney Vince Sliwoski, Megan will also address audience questions throughout the presentation. Please register by clicking here. For any additional questions regarding the webinar, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org. We hope you can join us!
We counsel our cannabis (and non-cannabis) clients extensively on product liability issues, and have warned them that the federal illegality of their products will not shield them from the same products liability risks faced by companies in other industries. We extend the same warnings to our cannabidiol (CBD) clients, who, if they are operating outside of a state-run cannabis licensing regime, are actually in a position of even greater risk. Lack of regulation in the CBD space is to the detriment of consumers, who often cannot be certain what ingredients the products they purchase actually contain, or whether those products are safe and free of contaminants.
It’s only a matter of time before harmed consumers start suing CBD companies alleging defective, dangerous, or mislabeled products (and Proposition 65 violations). Here are some posts we’ve written about product liability in the cannabis industry, which are highly relevant to CBD companies as well: