MN Lottery Order: Lawyer Says, “By taking this position, the court is acknowledging it does not have subject matter jurisdiction to hear the disputes. If the court doesn’t have subject matter jurisdiction, where is the court getting its authority to stay the lottery?”

Hemp Cultivation, Processing & Extraction News, Hemp Legalization & Regulatory News for Hemp Businesses

Source- Linked In Post

Carol R. M. Moss Litigation/Cannabis Business Attorney at law firm Hellmuth & Johnson, PLLC writes..

I hate to be a buzzkill, but this is not a strong order. 

The court directs applicants to the MN Court of Appeals to appeal their rejection through a writ of certiorari.

By taking this position, the court is acknowledging it does not have subject matter jurisdiction to hear the disputes. If the court doesn’t have subject matter jurisdiction, where is the court getting its authority to stay the lottery?

The order does not cite to any. (The court could not have granted the motion for TRO, because a required element is likelihood of success on the merits.

That element could not be satisfied, again, due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction.) I have a feeling the story of the pre-approval lottery is not over.

1732634938780

your paid advertisement here

Articles You May Like

CBD Oil vs. Hemp Oil: What’s the Difference? | GoodRx
Federal Appeals Court agrees with ban on medical cannabis advertising in Mississippi
MY FIRST TIME MAKING VEGAN PIZZA FROM SCRATCH: SPEND THE MORNING WITH ME
Stock To Buy Today Near 52 Week Low: how to invest for Beginners
💎 Our Crystallization Community Shines Bright! 💎

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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