Massachusetts Cannabis Dispensary Association Drops Delivery Lawsuit After Members Defect – THCnet


An influential cannabis trade group in Massachusetts has dropped a controversial lawsuit over newly enacted home delivery rules after several of its members ended their involvement with the group.

In a statement issued on Monday, the Cannabis Dispensary Association (CDA), which represents brick and mortar marijuana retailers, said the decision to withdraw its legal challenge was “in the best interest of the industry” as well as its members.

The lawsuit, filed against the Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) on Jan. 13, sought to overturn new marijuana delivery regulations that favor social equity and economic empowerment applicants.

Under rules approved by the CCC last November, two recreational cannabis delivery license types — “marijuana couriers” and “marijuana delivery operators” — were established and made available exclusively to disenfranchised groups for a minimum of three years.

The CDA, upset that its dispensary members were being cut out, argued in its lawsuit that existing Massachusetts law granted established retailers the ability to deliver cannabis products directly to consumers.

“Because the Commission’s new delivery regulations are in direct contravention of the Commission’s enabling statute in allowing delivery but not by licensed Marijuana Retailers under their existing retail licenses, they cannot stand,” the lawsuit read.

The CDA’s opposition to the new rules drew the ire of delivery applicants, diversity advocates and some dispensary operators who viewed the legal challenge as an “attack on equity.

“This is the opposite of supporting an inclusive industry,” Chris Fevry, the founder of Your Green Package and president of the Massachusetts Cannabis Association for Delivery (MCAD) said in an interview with MassLive last week.

Other groups, like Cannaclusive — a national organization that supports diversity, inclusion, and education in the cannabis industry — called for a boycott of dispensaries that did not oppose the CDA’s lawsuit.

Evidently, those calls were heard.

According to

Read More Here...

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on reddit
Share on pinterest
Share on email

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *