One of the outstanding legal uncertainties regarding our implementation of AZ Medical Marijuana Act has been the Compassion First v. Brewer lawsuit that challenged our authority to require future dispensaries to have a Medical Director. We’ve always thought dispensary medical direction was a key component to making sure that future dispensaries act in the best interest of patients and prevent recreational diversion. After a judge’s ruling today, it looks like we’ll be OK.
Today a Maricopa Superior Court judge denied the Plaintiffs’ “Motion for Leave” to Amend their previous Complaint (which the court invalidated some of our dispensary selection criteria). The Compassion First were attempting to re-open the case to challenge our requirement that dispensaries have a medical director.
In his opinion (that largely tracks our argument), the judge denied their Motion, finding that the Plaintiffs failed to provide an adequate basis for declining to bring the medical director challenge in their initial complaint and that we (and the public) would be unduly prejudiced if the Court were to grant their Motion. Of course, the Compassion First plaintiffs could always appeal- but (for now) the upshot is that we can require future dispensaries to have medical direction.
While the extremely over-exaggerated importance of the medical director seemed to catch a lot of heat, I for one am glad that they will be required, for now at least.
Why would any dispensary NOT want a medical director involved ??
That should be the more important question here.
Just my .02
Thanks for all the news, Will.
Can you let us know the required credentials necessary for the “Medical Director” position at a future dispensary?
Please follow the link and read R9-17-313 for details regarding the Medical Director.
While much publicity has been recently given to Connecticut for requiring dispensaries to have a pharmacist on staff, that state’s medical cannabis program simply does not compare to Arizona’s. We continue to be the leader, not only in the US, but internationally — showing how to regulate ‘whole plant’ medicine properly. Kudos for staying at this…
Thank you for the positive feedback, we appreciate it.
One thing that surely needs some clarity is the old “cannabis criminal code” that is being superimposed on the AMMA.
PLEASE clarify what is and what is NOT allowed before this program spins widely out of control due to enormous litigation problems.
There are lawyers flying to Arizona right now in anticipation of it all and I say this because I hired one from a slightly more experienced medicinal cannabis state.
Cannabis is what?
Marijuana is what?
What is legal and what is illegal according to the two conflicting sections of AZ law??
We have a RIGHT to know.
Please read section 36-2801. Definitions. If you still have questions please contact your attorney as we can’t give legal advice.
One thing for sure: you will always need clarity when dealing with this agency.
what can be done to try and change the 25 mile radious for being able to cultivate? I think people should be allowed to cultivate no matter how close a dispensary is. The option to buy your lights and grow yourself would be alot less of a monopoly. If we are only allowed to purchase our meds from a dispensary then everything is going to be way to expensive to even buy. Then what the guy who has the dispensary just gets all the money gets to mark up the price 400 percent because your not allowed to get it anywhere else. To me this is just asking for trouble.
Since the 25 miles was in the statute passed by the voters, it would take another voter initiative to change the law. The legislature can make changes that further the intention of the law, but ADHS does not have the ability to change it.
how do we initiate voters will you help me with this I need to be involved.