Panel: Extra Precautions Needed in the Legal Marijuana Biz
Despite its growing legality in different states across the country, the federal government's prohibition on marijuana makes working in the budding industry a little more difficult, a panel of attorneys including James Cole, partner at Sidley Austin in Washington, D.C. and former Deputy AG who authored the "Cole Memo" said at the Association of Corporate Counsel's annual meeting .
October 24, 2018 at 08:41 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
Despite its growing legality in different states across the country, the federal government's prohibition on marijuana makes working in the budding industry a little more difficult, a panel of attorneys who work with marijuana companies said at the Association of Corporate Counsel's annual meeting in Austin, Texas.
The risk and difficulty of helping to grow and operate a legal marijuana business became more apparent recently when U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded the Obama-era “Cole Memo.”
James Cole, co-lead partner of white collar litigation and investigations at Sidley Austin in Washington, D.C., who was deputy attorney general during the Obama administration, said that when Washington and Colorado legalized the use of marijuana for adults, he wrote the memorandum bearing his name. In short, stated that the Justice Department would not enforce federal marijuana prohibitions as long as states had their own regulations and enforcement except where not doing so would interfere with other federal priorities such as gang interdiction.
Cole said that, when the memo was rescinded, he was not overly worried about a crackdown on legal marijuana businesses.
“What Sessions did with his memo is give discretion back to the U.S. attorneys,” he said.
Cole explained that many U.S. attorneys are political people who hope to run for office someday. He said he doubted those attorneys would prosecute crimes in the states they hoped to run for office in.
Despite the lack of enforcement from federal authorities, Zachary Kobrin, general counsel and chief compliance officer of Cansortium Holdings LLC/Knox Medical, said operating as the top lawyer for a marijuana company is not easy.
“What I like to joke with other folks, especially lawyers, is that to me this is just another widget. It just happens to be the most highly regulated widget I've ever dealt with in my life,” Kobrin said.
He said attorneys need to do extra due diligence and add extra layers of disclosure about potential risks.
“One of the most obvious examples is traditional financing,” Kobrin said. “You're not going to J.P. Morgan to get a $20 million line [of credit] to expand operations in a state. The bulk of financing is done through private raises.”
As far as contracts go, Kobrin said, that to mitigate risks in a deal, he includes a strong arbitration clause and a waiver of jury clause.
“The more recent opinion among the industry is to push for arbitration or some kind of ADR provision because, if a dispute arrives between an operator [a grower] and some vendor, it is a contract dispute,” Kobrin said. “So, if you've got a very well-defined arbitration clause within any of your agreements, you're walking in with an arbitrator who understands contract issues instead of taking a chance with a judge who may or may not be an activist judge or doesn't know enough about the industry.”
Advice for those thinking about getting into the marijuana industry? Know the risks. Cole said he gets calls every day from different kinds of businesses, and he tells them it is unlikely that the federal government would crack down on marijuana, but that could change the next day.
“You go into it based on the risk appetite. Many time, the higher the risk, the higher the reward as well. I can tell you whether it's legal or not but you're going to have to make the decision,” Cole said.
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUS Judge Rejects Morgan Stanley Reconsideration Bid in Deferred Compensation Litigation
Transgender Woman Awarded $150K Default Judgment Against Corrections Officer for Alleged Assault
Legal Speak: A Convicted Felon is Coming to the White House. What Happens Now?
1 minute readAT&T General Counsel Joins ADM Board as Company Reels From Accounting Scandal
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250