A three-judge appellate court panel heard arguments Tuesday in a case that has stalled the expansion of the New Jersey’s burdened medical marijuana program.
But the court must still issue a decision before the state can reopen its review of licenses that a lawsuit put on hold in late 2019.
The case involves eight rejected medical marijuana applicants from a round of licensing the Department of Health opened in 2019. The applicants in question lost out due to technical issues with their applications or because they had insufficient documents to show the town they wished to operate in approved of the business.
But they argue the department incorrectly rejected their applications during its first round of cuts and should reconsider them along with 146 others still in the running.
“The entire purpose of this undertaking is to ensure a merit-based review so that the best and most qualified applicants are awarded licenses to serve the patient population,” Joshua Bauchner, one of the attorneys representing the appellants, said during the hearing, which was held remotely.
“There is no reason to disavow that undertaking. These applications should be scored along with the rest so that the best candidates are awarded licenses and we can proceed.”
More than 190 groups applied for 24 licenses in the summer of 2019. The licenses ranged from large operations to grow,…
Original Author Link click here to read complete story..
A three-judge appellate court panel heard arguments Tuesday in a case that has stalled the expansion of the New Jersey’s burdened medical marijuana program.
But the court must still issue a decision before the state can reopen its review of licenses that a lawsuit put on hold in late 2019.
The case involves eight rejected medical marijuana applicants from a round of licensing the Department of Health opened in 2019. The applicants in question lost out due to technical issues with their applications or because they had insufficient documents to show the town they wished to operate in approved of the business.
But they argue the department incorrectly rejected their applications during its first round of cuts and should reconsider them along with 146 others still in the running.
“The entire purpose of this undertaking is to ensure a merit-based review so that the best and most qualified applicants are awarded licenses to serve the patient population,” Joshua Bauchner, one of the attorneys representing the appellants, said during the hearing, which was held remotely.
“There is no reason to disavow that undertaking. These applications should be scored along with the rest so that the best candidates are awarded licenses and we can proceed.”
More than 190 groups applied for 24 licenses in the summer of 2019. The licenses ranged from large operations to grow,…
