Skip to content

A Survey of Legal Issues & Risk Management Methods for Medical Marijuana Start-ups in Ohio

A terrific guest speaker for part of my last class means that my Marijuana Law, Policy & Reform seminar students are going to be making a large number of class presentations this week.  So, blog readers should be prepared and excited to be seeing a bunch of posting about diverse topics that are the focal point for student work.  For example, one student is focused on medical marijuana “start ups” in the Buckeye State, and he has provided the following synopsis and links as a preview of his presentation:

The conflict of Ohio law and applicable federal law on medical marijuana presents a myriad of legal issues for individuals and businesses to consider when deciding whether to participate in the new cannabis industry.  But because federal law preempts conflicting state law, the primary goal of participants should be to manage the risk of federal enforcement uncertainty to an acceptable level.  For those who are willing and able to manage the risk of uncertainty, participation in the new cannabis industry is not just about making money -it’s also about making history.  Meanwhile, those who are unable to navigate the complex contours of cannabis law are left watching from the sidelines.

1.      Federal Preemption: Risk of Forfeiture. August 2013 Cole MemoThe Role of Local Law Enforcement in Civil Forfeiture

2.      Local Government Law: Risk of Local Zoning/Land Use Restrictions. Ohio H.B. 523Garcia v. Siffrin Residential Ass’n, 63 Ohio St. 2d 259, 407 N.E.2d 1369 (1980)

3.      Banking Law: Risk of Money Laundering Liability. BSA Expectations Regarding Marijuana-Related Businesses.

4.      Intellectual Property Law: Risk of Unsecured Enforcement Rights. In re Morgan Brown, U.S.P.T.O. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, Serial No. 86/362,968 (2016)In re Christopher C. Hinton, U.S.P.T.O. Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, Serial No. 85/713,080 (2015).

5.      Tax Law: Risk of Preclusion. Capitalization of Inventoriable CostsCalifornians Helping to Alleviate Med. Problems, Inc. v. Comm’r, 128 T.C. 173 (2007).

6.      Employment Law: Risk of Disputes. Ohio HB 523Casias v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 695 F.3d 428 (6th Cir. 2012).

7.      Bankruptcy Law: Risk of Relief Dismissal. In re Arenas, 514 B.R. 887 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2014)In re McGinnis, 453 B.R. 770 (Bankr. D. Or. 2011).