In the days of the Armada, a fleet of warships, the scuttlebutt was the rumor or gossip that would spread throughout the ship. Today, Armada Law Corp presents The Scuttlebutt, a daily summery of news articles that people within the cannabis, hemp and plant medicine industries are chatting about along with links to the full articles.
In today’s news:
#cannabisindustry – “New Mexico has revoked the license of a marijuana retailer in Albuquerque for selling out-of-state cannabis in violation of state law, the state cannabis control division announced Thursday.
Regulators allege that the Paradise Exotics Distro cannabis store on a central shopping thoroughfare sold cannabis products imported from California and marked with a California stamp of origin. Representatives for the business could not immediately be reached by phone or social media.”
According to the text of the bill
, it “authorizes the issuance of a state temporary event license to a licensee authorizing onsite cannabis sales to, and consumption by, persons 21 years of age or older at a county fair event, district agricultural association event, or at another venue expressly approved by a local jurisdiction, as specified.””
#californiacannabis – “The five finalists that didn’t win last year’s competitive licensing process appealed the city’s decision, and the appeal process has dragged on for more than six months. In late June, the three businesses that won filed a lawsuit against the city, asking for a court order that would end the appeals and force the city to issue them permits.
In the meantime, those three operators are moving toward opening, with “coming soon” and “now hiring” signs up in one location’s windows, though they can’t actually open until they have their permits in hand. The other five dispensary operators are in talks with the city over potentially expanding the initial round of permits.”
#cannabislawsuit – “In a motion to compel arbitration filed Tuesday, Catalyst Cannabis Co. argued that while only one of the plaintiffs, Veronica Romero, was employed during the term of the bargaining agreement, it still applies to the other two plaintiffs – Sam Barrad and Yesenia Reyes – who left before the agreement went into effect.
The bargaining agreement, Catalyst said, covers legal grievance claims brought within their statutes of limitation, and the plaintiffs’ claims “appear to have been.” The agreement is not limited to claims brought during the term of the then-existing collective bargaining agreement, the cannabis company argued.
“It also does not contain any limitations based on the age of the claim or the employment dates of the affected employee, and by its express terms applies to any and all claims relating to an employee’s ‘conditions of employment,'” the motion said.”
Calif. Pot Co. Says Sex Bias Claims Must Be Arbitrated: https://www.law360.com/articles/1698901?utm_source=android&utm_medium=android&utm_campaign=android-shared