Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
New York's recently enacted cannabis law, the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation of 2021 (MRTA), created a maze of new legal requirements. These provisions affect not only cannabis companies, but also the companies that conduct business with them. Navigating this maze can be tricky, especially since much of the MRTA conflicts with federal law. One particularly complex area is the regulation of New York real estate as it relates to cannabis companies. Cannabis companies and landowners alike should be wary of the legal pitfalls in this area and seek appropriate legal guidance.
Under the MRTA, New York will grant licenses to companies to distribute cannabis. Although these companies will be state-licensed, it likely will violate the federal "stash-house law" to lease property to them. Landowners may be reluctant to lease to licensed cannabis businesses and risk federal criminal liability, when they could lease to other types of businesses without that risk. This landowner reluctance could create a Catch-22 for cannabis companies: to get a state license, they need property from which to operate their cannabis business; but to get property, under federal law, they cannot plan to sell cannabis from it.
The MRTA contains a provision that seems like it could help cannabis companies with reluctant landowners; specifically, it has a lease mandate, which prevents landowners from discriminating against at least some participants in the legal cannabis market. Precisely who the lease mandate protects, though, is subject to debate. While it could be read to prevent landowner discrimination against cannabis consumers and cannabis companies — as opposed to just cannabis consumers — such an interpretation likely would result in federal preemption of the mandate. To avoid preemption, courts likely will interpret the mandate narrowly, prohibiting discrimination only against cannabis consumers. So, cannabis companies should not put too much stock in this mandate when attempting to secure a property.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Businesses have long embraced the use of computer technology in the workplace as a means of improving efficiency and productivity of their operations. In recent years, businesses have incorporated artificial intelligence and other automated and algorithmic technologies into their computer systems. This article provides an overview of the federal regulatory guidance and the state and local rules in place so far and suggests ways in which employers may wish to address these developments with policies and practices to reduce legal risk.
This two-part article dives into the massive shifts AI is bringing to Google Search and SEO and why traditional searches are no longer part of the solution for marketers. It’s not theoretical, it’s happening, and firms that adapt will come out ahead.
For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.
In an era where the workplace is constantly evolving, law firms face unique challenges and opportunities in facilities management, real estate, and design. Across the industry, firms are reevaluating their office spaces to adapt to hybrid work models, prioritize collaboration, and enhance employee experience. Trends such as flexible seating, technology-driven planning, and the creation of multifunctional spaces are shaping the future of law firm offices.
Protection against unauthorized model distillation is an emerging issue within the longstanding theme of safeguarding intellectual property. This article examines the legal protections available under the current legal framework and explore why patents may serve as a crucial safeguard against unauthorized distillation.