Jesse co-chairs Harris Bricken’s Dispute Resolution / Litigation practice group. He has an extensive domestic and international litigation background and has represented clients from a wide range of industries in high stakes disputes. Jesse represents numerous clients in the cannabis industry and he regularly writes on litigation issues involving hemp and CBD. In every dispute, it is Jesse’s goal to find the best and most cost-effective solution for his clients. His analytical mind, excellent writing skills, and steady presence allow him to find unique solutions to complicated domestic and international disputes.
As Minnesota approaches the legalization of marijuana, the Minnesota Supreme Court has just ruled on a case we covered in September 2021. The case involves the difference between hemp and marijuana and a state prosecutor’s burden to prove what side of the line a leafy or liquid cannabis substance falls. As we explained two years
The Safe Banking Act, also known as the Secure and Fair Enforcement Banking Act (SAFE Banking Act), is sorely needed legislation to address the critical issue of financial services being denied to marijuana businesses that operate in the state-legalized industries. We’ve written extensively about the SAFE Banking Act over the past several years. See here,
A few years ago I wrote a somewhat tongue-in-cheek blog post titled, “Cannabots – Are the Robots Coming For Your Weed,” which discussed the application of robotics to the cultivation of marijuana. In that post I cited several articles discussing the use of robots as farmers, restaurant workers, fashion models, and even lawyers. Just a
In November 2022, the OLCC adopted and amended a suite of cannabis rules that became effective January 1, 2023. You can download the changes here and read our previous coverage of many of these changes here, here, here, and here. Now that Oregon’s new cannabis rules are effective, let’s take a look at some of
For several years one of the biggest problems the cannabis industry has faced is I.R.C. Section 280E. It suffocates the regulated marijuana industry. A recent decision by the Oregon Tax Court addresses Section 280E and what may properly fall under Cost of Goods Sold (“COGS”) in the context of a marijuana grow operation. (See here, here, here, here and here
Cannabis brands are known for clever branding and advertising. In some instances, this gets cannabis companies in trouble. See Cannabis Trademark Litigation: Wrigley Wins. Sometimes cannabis companies try to hew the parody line when riffing on an existing trademark. See Reminder: The Parody Defense to Trademark Infringement is Tricky. As my cannabis litigation colleague, Jihee
The OLCC rulemaking process continues after a public hearing on October 25 and the close of the public comment period on October 31. You can read our prior coverage here, here and here, and you can read the proposed rules here. The public hearing lasted about 35 minutes and a hot topic was whether retailers may
This post continues our discussion of rule changes proposed by the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission (OLCC). (Other posts here and here, and please stay tuned for an omnibus post by Vince Sliwoski). Today the topic is a proposed revision to the rules governing changes in business structure. In particular, a proposed conditional approval rule
The Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission (OLCC) regularly engages in new rulemaking and this year is no different. The OLCC has a proposed a slate of rule changes it deigns as responsive to implement 2022 legislation and technical updates. But this round of rulemaking has numerous substantial revisions to the rules that are not required
The Oregon marijuana industry is hurting, much like industry in California and other states. Among the many reasons (overproduction, market saturation) is that federal marijuana laws have not been reformed at all. For years marijuana entrepreneurs and their cheerleaders have repeated the refrain that federal reform of marijuana laws is just around the corner. These
