Notable Links

Denver Internet Marketing by Parallel Path

Knowledge Messenger

Arvada Boutique Clothing Store Stella B's

Pot Wars Round 2, Judge tosses out health board decision on medical pot

by: Whiskey Lima Juliet

Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 15:05:15 PM MST

( - promoted by ClubTwitty)

Let's Get Ready to Rumble!!!!! OK, I have to admit, this is too much fun for me!

The State Board lost this round and had to PAY ATTORNEY FEES!! I ask this humble question, "Is this how the State wants to spend what little money it has?"

Whiskey Lima Juliet :: Pot Wars Round 2, Judge tosses out health board decision on medical pot

A Denver District Court judge rebuked the state board of health today for changing rules about medical marijuana without providing adequate notice to patients.
In his ruling, Chief Denver District Court Judge Larry Naves struck down the state board's actions from a meeting earlier this month. At that telephone conference meeting the board repealed the definition of medical-marijuana "caregiver", casting the burgeoning industry into uncertainty -- all without taking public testimony. Naves also ordered the state to pay the attorneys' fees of medical-marijuana advocates, who filed a motion saying they were wrongly blocked from participating in the hearing.

http://www.denverpost.com/news...

Tags: (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Pot Wars Round 2, Judge tosses out health board decision on medical pot | 11 comments

wow. That is big news! n/t

by: Jambalaya @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:12:44 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

It is ALWAYS cause for celebration

when the other side has to ante up for the attorney fees!

Way to go.

--From a "real dick."
by: JO

by: Middle of the Road @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:41:37 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Reason?

Did the judge rule that the board's new rule violated our constitution or that the board's public notice was fatally flawed? Or both?

I think that if the judge's main concern was over public meeting fairness issues, then the board shall soon have a public meeting and re-issue the same rule.

by: telltale @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:49:38 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

public notice was violated

You are probably correct about the net effect, but then the actual issue will be litigated.

This is the problem when you have conflicting regulations, statutes (federal & state) and constitutional provisions.

by: Danny the Red (hair) @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 16:55:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

wait a gosh darn minute...

...are you suggesting that this whole litigation matter will change nothing? That the same rule, or change to the rule, will likely be in effect in another month? So, the net effect of this lawsuit is nothing more than the state paying some lawyer fees and nothing more? Where are my rosary beads???

by: Jambalaya @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 18:12:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Sounded like the judge put a human face on the significance of his ruling...

Medical marijuana attorney Rob Corry, though, argued today that the Court of Appeals opinion applies only to cases prosecuted before the state adopted its caregiver definition this summer. In sharp exchanges with Colorado First Assistant Attorney General Anne Holton, Naves sided with Corry's interpretation of the ruling, saying the state wasn't justified in holding an emergency hearing and excluding patients' voices.
"How can you not consider the impact on the health of Mr. LaGoy when they changed the rules?" Naves asked.
"Your honor," Holton responded, "I think it's important to keep in mind that this is a temporary rule."
"It's not temporary," Naves replied, "for Mr. LaGoy."

by: Canines @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 21:43:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Possibly the board will reissue the same rule...

But, then again, the state board of health will have to actually listen to testimony this next time about why the facts of the recent court case don't warrant a change in the rules (as the judge indicated in the article above). And they'll have to listen to testimony again from several hundred patients. And the board will have to explain itself credibly in the glare of the media.

As it's often said, it takes a big person to admit that he or she was wrong. We'll find out what size and dimensions the members of the board of health are, after this next hearing.

by: Canines @ Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 07:52:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Congratulations WLJ!

Keep you red eyes on the ball:-)

This battle is far from over.

"In short, we eat oil" ardy39

by: Sir Robin @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 18:07:08 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Jailing people for reefer is insane

The wr on drugs is lost. Peole are doing hrd time for over an ounce while medical marijuana is sld by the bushel.

The only legacy that prohibition gave the USA is organized crime, and stock car racing.

How about a 5 trillion tax cut for the upper 1% that's borrowed from China and then invested in China? The Republican platform has legs.

by: Ray Springfield @ Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 19:21:27 PM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

What Were They Smoking?

The sheer incompetence of the Board of Health forces the question: What were they smoking?

Michael Bennet had me at "Obama"

by: caroman @ Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:23:51 AM CST

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Hells Yeah!

Good news. One more step in the goal towards getting the gummint outta of our way!