ThomJefferson
Well-Known Member
how about posting a shot of the tubing also
Warning new off gassing product!!!!
- Thread starter u.g.u
- Start date
Just a heads up.
NGW has began distributing new tube with no packaging and no writing on the tube what so ever. I have not had a chance to have it tested yet, I just received a new roll yesterday. But be on the look out. I would only use general hydro or hydro farm since those are both marked and has been proved safe.
NGW has began distributing new tube with no packaging and no writing on the tube what so ever. I have not had a chance to have it tested yet, I just received a new roll yesterday. But be on the look out. I would only use general hydro or hydro farm since those are both marked and has been proved safe.
Did Sunlight Supply Poison Hydroponics Medical Marijuana?
Did Sunlight Supply Poison Hydroponics Medical Marijuana?
A few years ago, professional state-legal California medical marijuana growers noticed their hydroponics crops were showing yellowing leaves, stunted growth, and poor yields. In some cases, entire crop cycles were wiped out.
The growers lost huge amounts of sleep, money and valuable medical marijuana, nearly going crazy trying to understand what was killing their crops. They examined all the factors you’re supposed to examine when you have crop problems: pH, water quality, nutrients, climate control, pests, diseases, plant genetics. You name it, they looked at it.
Through a process of elimination they narrowed the cause down to a toxin called Diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) allegedly contained in National Garden Wholesale (NGW) ½” Black Flexible Polyvinyl Chloride Tubing. NGW is an affiliate of hydroponics distributor Sunlight Supply, and all three entities are also known or affiliated as IP Holdings LLC.
The hydroponics growers say they had tests run, and conducted tests themselves. Convinced by the testing that NGW tubing was the culprit, they contacted Sunlight Supply and NGW, seeking an explanation and compensation. They got nowhere, so they retained an attorney, Jeffrey Lake. After Lake contacted Sunlight/NGW, he received an August, 2010 letter from an attorney representing the companies. The attorney is named Joshua Stump.
Mr. Stump’s letter offers various attacks dismissing the growers’ claim that NGW tubing damaged their crops. It also contains a troubling section in which Stump says that regardless of whether the growers’ crops were legal according to California law, they were still illegal under federal law. As such, the lawyer claimed, the “illegality” of the medical marijuana enterprise would likely protect Sunlight/NGW from product liability claims.
Stump further hones in on the medical marijuana aspects of the situation by asking all kinds of prying questions about the identity and confidential financial and/or medical history of medical marijuana patients and growers.
Medical marijuana attorneys who examine Stump’s letter say Stump’s approach leaves the impression that Sunlight/NGW is making a veiled threat to harass and/or nark out medical marijuana growers and patients as part of the Sunlight Supply defense strategy should the hydroponics growers file a product liability claim.
On November 22, 2010, Lake and his client plaintiffs (referred to as BT Collective) filed a class action complaint against IP/NGW/Sunlight in San Diego County Superior Court.
During my research about DIBP and other toxins that might enter plants via hydroponics materials, I learned that such chemicals may harm humans as well as hydroponics plants. I also discovered a substantial record of complaints and concerns regarding toxicity problems associated with indoor hydroponics grow tents and chambers made from plastics and other materials.
Beginning in 2006-07, an increasing flood of hydroponics growers began complaining in online hydroponics cultivation forums and elsewhere about off-gassing and poisoning caused by toxins in hydroponics grow tent materials and similar materials. Hydroponics growers told me they’d had problems with indoor chambers made or distributed by HydroHut, Sunlight Supply and other companies.
Reports from growers indicate that of the tent/chamber manufacturers whose customers were complaining about toxic materials, only HydroHut exercised good customer service in seeking to resolve the issues.
In preparation for writing this article, I directly contacted Sunlight Supply to ask them about their tubing and the court filing, and I had previously posted a hydroponics article containing public questions for Sunlight Supply. The only response I ever got from Sunlight Supply was one email from Stump.
But instead of providing the information that hydroponics growers need to know about Sunlight Supply products and the Sunlight Supply customer service and warranty policies, Stump tried to get me to disclose information about myself.
I was leaked what is purportedly a communication sent to hydroponics dealers from Sunlight Supply’s president, Craig Hargreaves, regarding BT Collective’s claims about NGW tubing. I am including the letter in its entirety, because I want to make sure that Sunlight Supply’s version of events is represented fairly. Here is the letter Hargreaves allegedly sent to his retailers:
Craig R. Hargreaves
“I write to you today to discuss a matter pertaining to our Eco-Plus ½ inch black (part # 708235) and blue (part # 708225) branded tubing. Sunlight Supply/NGW has purchased this tubing from a Chinese manufacturer for approximately 3 years now and have sold it without any complaints from our customers. However, we recently received a single complaint from a group called "The BT Collective", a group out of Southern California stating that use of this tubing has caused damage to their crop. When we were first notified of this complaint we requested additional information to help us verify the claim. While the BT Collective responded to this request with additional claims, they failed to provide adequate information to determine whether any of the tubing had caused harm to their crops.
The claim cites that a certain chemical used in the makeup of the tubing, is specifically responsible. To date, we have no credible evidence that this chemical, which is used to give plastic products a soft, pliable feel, has caused any harm to any customer's crops.
Sunlight Supply/National Garden Wholesale has purchased and sold this tubing for 3 years. In this timeframe, we have not received a single complaint from any storeowner or consumer before hearing from the BT Collective. In our experience, when there is a product on the market which is causing plant damage, that problem is quickly discovered. Our customers understandably care a lot about their plants and tend to report problems immediately after they are discovered. In short, we believe that if there were truly a problem with the tubing we have sold, we would have heard about it from customers long before now and from multiple sources. We have not.
Further, when we first started purchasing this tubing, we conducted internal tests by growing plants fertilized and irrigated with water running through the tubing and simultaneously submerged a full 100-foot roll in the reservoir. Our internal tests revealed no damage to the plants.
Sunlight Supply/NGW is a distributor of thousands of different products manufactured by hundreds of different manufactures. Black ½ inch vinyl tubing (the vast majority of sales) is a commodity product both for the industry and us. Sunlight Supply/NGW has no good reason to believe that the tubing it has been purchasing from its Chinese manufacturer causes harm to plants. However, rather than engage in a complex scientific debate, it is far easier for us to merely change tubing vendors.
Out of an abundance of caution, here are the steps we have taken:
Discontinued purchasing from the previous Chinese vendor for the Eco-Plus branded ½ black (product #708235) and blue (product # 708225) vinyl tubing.
Discontinued selling to Dealer Partners these 2 products.
Clarification - The Chinese manufacturer made only 2 of the tubing products (1/2" black and 1/2" blue). No complaints have been received related to any other tubing products in the dealer catalog (page 262).
Changed over to a domestic (USA) supplier on ½ inch black and blue vinyl tubing. These products will now be sold under the Gro-Pro brand name. For inventory clarification, the part numbers have changed. GroPro brand ½ inch black tubing is part #708265, ½ inch blue tubing is part #708260.
All orders now shipping, on ½ inch black and blue vinyl are now made in the USA and have been certified by the manufacturer as, "food grade" and made with only FDA approved materials.
In a good faith show of support for you, our valued business partners, we are offering to take back for credit or exchange (for the USA GroPro brand product) this tubing from any dealer partner wishing to return the Eco-Plus brand ½ inch black or blue tubing. Please contact your local customer service representative with any such requests.
Sunlight Supply/National Garden Wholesale takes our obligation to provide our Dealer Partners with quality, safe and functional products extremely seriously as we have for the last 15 years. At this time, we have no verifiable evidence beyond the BT Collectives claim, that plants irrigated and fertilized through EcoPlus brand ½ inch black and blue has caused damage to plants. However, we felt obligated to inform our Valued Dealer Partners of this matter.
As always, thank you for your ongoing support of our company.
Craig R. Hargreaves, President
Obviously, if you are using an indoor hydroponics pre-made chamber, or thinking of buying one, be sure to ask the manufacturer about toxic off-gassing and warranties. In general, you need to be cautious when using any plastic or other petroleum-based material in your grow room, and do what you can to determine if it might off-gas anything that harms you or your plants.
Please note that Big Mike Straumietis of Advanced Nutrients has repeatedly charged that Sunlight Supply and its allies are amoral profiteers who refuse to respect or acknowledge the medical marijuana community or legal hydroponics medical marijuana growers, but they do like to make tons of money selling them hydroponics products.
You’ll note for example that in the Sunlight Supply letter you just read, Craig Hargreaves offers only to reimburse “dealer partners” (retailers) for unused NGW ½ inch tubing. He makes no offer to reimburse growers who say they’ve lost tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical marijuana crops because of that tubing.
“The issue of whether NGW tubing poisoned crops will be explored scientifically, I hope. What worries medical marijuana growers is a big hydroponics company that responds to a warranty issue by hiring a lawyer who hides behind medical marijuana being illegal federally,” said a hydroponics grower not affiliated with BT Collective. “We already knew that Sunlight, Hydrofarm, Maximum Yield, Urban Garden and the rest of those types are hypocrites who won’t allow any mention of medical marijuana growers at their trade shows and in their magazines, even though medical marijuana growers are a majority of hydroponics customers. But when Sunlight Supply uses federal marijuana law to shield itself against claims from hydroponics growers whose crops got ruined, that’s worse than hypocrisy.”
Did Sunlight Supply Poison Hydroponics Medical Marijuana?
A few years ago, professional state-legal California medical marijuana growers noticed their hydroponics crops were showing yellowing leaves, stunted growth, and poor yields. In some cases, entire crop cycles were wiped out.
The growers lost huge amounts of sleep, money and valuable medical marijuana, nearly going crazy trying to understand what was killing their crops. They examined all the factors you’re supposed to examine when you have crop problems: pH, water quality, nutrients, climate control, pests, diseases, plant genetics. You name it, they looked at it.
Through a process of elimination they narrowed the cause down to a toxin called Diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) allegedly contained in National Garden Wholesale (NGW) ½” Black Flexible Polyvinyl Chloride Tubing. NGW is an affiliate of hydroponics distributor Sunlight Supply, and all three entities are also known or affiliated as IP Holdings LLC.
The hydroponics growers say they had tests run, and conducted tests themselves. Convinced by the testing that NGW tubing was the culprit, they contacted Sunlight Supply and NGW, seeking an explanation and compensation. They got nowhere, so they retained an attorney, Jeffrey Lake. After Lake contacted Sunlight/NGW, he received an August, 2010 letter from an attorney representing the companies. The attorney is named Joshua Stump.
Mr. Stump’s letter offers various attacks dismissing the growers’ claim that NGW tubing damaged their crops. It also contains a troubling section in which Stump says that regardless of whether the growers’ crops were legal according to California law, they were still illegal under federal law. As such, the lawyer claimed, the “illegality” of the medical marijuana enterprise would likely protect Sunlight/NGW from product liability claims.
Stump further hones in on the medical marijuana aspects of the situation by asking all kinds of prying questions about the identity and confidential financial and/or medical history of medical marijuana patients and growers.
Medical marijuana attorneys who examine Stump’s letter say Stump’s approach leaves the impression that Sunlight/NGW is making a veiled threat to harass and/or nark out medical marijuana growers and patients as part of the Sunlight Supply defense strategy should the hydroponics growers file a product liability claim.
On November 22, 2010, Lake and his client plaintiffs (referred to as BT Collective) filed a class action complaint against IP/NGW/Sunlight in San Diego County Superior Court.
During my research about DIBP and other toxins that might enter plants via hydroponics materials, I learned that such chemicals may harm humans as well as hydroponics plants. I also discovered a substantial record of complaints and concerns regarding toxicity problems associated with indoor hydroponics grow tents and chambers made from plastics and other materials.
Beginning in 2006-07, an increasing flood of hydroponics growers began complaining in online hydroponics cultivation forums and elsewhere about off-gassing and poisoning caused by toxins in hydroponics grow tent materials and similar materials. Hydroponics growers told me they’d had problems with indoor chambers made or distributed by HydroHut, Sunlight Supply and other companies.
Reports from growers indicate that of the tent/chamber manufacturers whose customers were complaining about toxic materials, only HydroHut exercised good customer service in seeking to resolve the issues.
In preparation for writing this article, I directly contacted Sunlight Supply to ask them about their tubing and the court filing, and I had previously posted a hydroponics article containing public questions for Sunlight Supply. The only response I ever got from Sunlight Supply was one email from Stump.
But instead of providing the information that hydroponics growers need to know about Sunlight Supply products and the Sunlight Supply customer service and warranty policies, Stump tried to get me to disclose information about myself.
I was leaked what is purportedly a communication sent to hydroponics dealers from Sunlight Supply’s president, Craig Hargreaves, regarding BT Collective’s claims about NGW tubing. I am including the letter in its entirety, because I want to make sure that Sunlight Supply’s version of events is represented fairly. Here is the letter Hargreaves allegedly sent to his retailers:
Craig R. Hargreaves
“I write to you today to discuss a matter pertaining to our Eco-Plus ½ inch black (part # 708235) and blue (part # 708225) branded tubing. Sunlight Supply/NGW has purchased this tubing from a Chinese manufacturer for approximately 3 years now and have sold it without any complaints from our customers. However, we recently received a single complaint from a group called "The BT Collective", a group out of Southern California stating that use of this tubing has caused damage to their crop. When we were first notified of this complaint we requested additional information to help us verify the claim. While the BT Collective responded to this request with additional claims, they failed to provide adequate information to determine whether any of the tubing had caused harm to their crops.
The claim cites that a certain chemical used in the makeup of the tubing, is specifically responsible. To date, we have no credible evidence that this chemical, which is used to give plastic products a soft, pliable feel, has caused any harm to any customer's crops.
Sunlight Supply/National Garden Wholesale has purchased and sold this tubing for 3 years. In this timeframe, we have not received a single complaint from any storeowner or consumer before hearing from the BT Collective. In our experience, when there is a product on the market which is causing plant damage, that problem is quickly discovered. Our customers understandably care a lot about their plants and tend to report problems immediately after they are discovered. In short, we believe that if there were truly a problem with the tubing we have sold, we would have heard about it from customers long before now and from multiple sources. We have not.
Further, when we first started purchasing this tubing, we conducted internal tests by growing plants fertilized and irrigated with water running through the tubing and simultaneously submerged a full 100-foot roll in the reservoir. Our internal tests revealed no damage to the plants.
Sunlight Supply/NGW is a distributor of thousands of different products manufactured by hundreds of different manufactures. Black ½ inch vinyl tubing (the vast majority of sales) is a commodity product both for the industry and us. Sunlight Supply/NGW has no good reason to believe that the tubing it has been purchasing from its Chinese manufacturer causes harm to plants. However, rather than engage in a complex scientific debate, it is far easier for us to merely change tubing vendors.
Out of an abundance of caution, here are the steps we have taken:
Discontinued purchasing from the previous Chinese vendor for the Eco-Plus branded ½ black (product #708235) and blue (product # 708225) vinyl tubing.
Discontinued selling to Dealer Partners these 2 products.
Clarification - The Chinese manufacturer made only 2 of the tubing products (1/2" black and 1/2" blue). No complaints have been received related to any other tubing products in the dealer catalog (page 262).
Changed over to a domestic (USA) supplier on ½ inch black and blue vinyl tubing. These products will now be sold under the Gro-Pro brand name. For inventory clarification, the part numbers have changed. GroPro brand ½ inch black tubing is part #708265, ½ inch blue tubing is part #708260.
All orders now shipping, on ½ inch black and blue vinyl are now made in the USA and have been certified by the manufacturer as, "food grade" and made with only FDA approved materials.
In a good faith show of support for you, our valued business partners, we are offering to take back for credit or exchange (for the USA GroPro brand product) this tubing from any dealer partner wishing to return the Eco-Plus brand ½ inch black or blue tubing. Please contact your local customer service representative with any such requests.
Sunlight Supply/National Garden Wholesale takes our obligation to provide our Dealer Partners with quality, safe and functional products extremely seriously as we have for the last 15 years. At this time, we have no verifiable evidence beyond the BT Collectives claim, that plants irrigated and fertilized through EcoPlus brand ½ inch black and blue has caused damage to plants. However, we felt obligated to inform our Valued Dealer Partners of this matter.
As always, thank you for your ongoing support of our company.
Craig R. Hargreaves, President
Obviously, if you are using an indoor hydroponics pre-made chamber, or thinking of buying one, be sure to ask the manufacturer about toxic off-gassing and warranties. In general, you need to be cautious when using any plastic or other petroleum-based material in your grow room, and do what you can to determine if it might off-gas anything that harms you or your plants.
Please note that Big Mike Straumietis of Advanced Nutrients has repeatedly charged that Sunlight Supply and its allies are amoral profiteers who refuse to respect or acknowledge the medical marijuana community or legal hydroponics medical marijuana growers, but they do like to make tons of money selling them hydroponics products.
You’ll note for example that in the Sunlight Supply letter you just read, Craig Hargreaves offers only to reimburse “dealer partners” (retailers) for unused NGW ½ inch tubing. He makes no offer to reimburse growers who say they’ve lost tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical marijuana crops because of that tubing.
“The issue of whether NGW tubing poisoned crops will be explored scientifically, I hope. What worries medical marijuana growers is a big hydroponics company that responds to a warranty issue by hiring a lawyer who hides behind medical marijuana being illegal federally,” said a hydroponics grower not affiliated with BT Collective. “We already knew that Sunlight, Hydrofarm, Maximum Yield, Urban Garden and the rest of those types are hypocrites who won’t allow any mention of medical marijuana growers at their trade shows and in their magazines, even though medical marijuana growers are a majority of hydroponics customers. But when Sunlight Supply uses federal marijuana law to shield itself against claims from hydroponics growers whose crops got ruined, that’s worse than hypocrisy.”
ratatoolie
Active Member
get rich quick scheme?
javawanabe
Member
Yo. I just luckily stumbled onto this thread. I actually have some of that tubing (I know I saw the logo somewhere) but thankfully, it's not in my garden. But it got me thinking because I have a few plants that are exhibiting almost identical symptoms, although not as severe (I assume because I'm only using it from the chiller to the rez). It's 5/8" black flex tubing. Have you heard of this off-gassing occuring in other black flex besides the 1/2" N-G-W.com stuff???
Now I'm stressed.
Now I'm stressed.
Big Tomato
Member
Medical pot business wants to keep court battle secret
At first glance, the lawsuit filed this year in federal court in downtown San Diego by BT Collective appears to be nothing more than a dispute over allegations that one business sold faulty products to another.
But a closer look shows the suit, a potential class-action case, is more than that — one where a pursuit for secrecy by both sides earned the ire of a federal judge and which illustrates the conflict between state and federal law over medical marijuana.
BT Collective is a medical marijuana operation in San Diego that opaquely describes itself in the lawsuit as a manufacturer of “natural and organic health care plant products.” It filed suit against Sunlight Supply, a Washington company that sells indoor gardening supplies, blaming the business for selling black flexible irrigation tubing that contains a toxin that ravaged and wiped out the collectives plants.
Last week, both sides requested to file under seal Sunlight Supply’s motion to dismiss the case, as well as all of its exhibits and any further legal briefs from either side.
The reason: The documents would touch on “sensitive matters pertaining to criminal liability due to differences between state and federal law.”
In other words, they would be talking about cultivating marijuana — legal under California’s medical marijuana law but illegal under federal law.
U.S. District Judge Larry A. Burns would have none of it. “BT Collective is more than welcome to bring this case against Sunlight Supply, but it cannot expect the Court to insulate it from the collateral consequences of doing so,” he wrote Tuesday.
In a sharply worded three-page order, Burns said the collective was trying to fly “under the radar of federal law enforcement.”
Earlier in the case, both sides agreed that the deposition of BT Collective CEO Travis Yost would be taken under seal, citing the same federal-state law concerns.
That request was granted by a different judge, but Burns wiped out that order, too, saying the deposition is not in the case file and the witnesses avoided any criminal issue by “vigorously asserting their Fifth Amendment rights in response to questioning.”
The collective now has two choices, Burns concluded. “One, it can litigate the case with total transparency and roll the dice that the United States does not file criminal charges against it,” he said. Or, it can drop the suit.
Yost did not respond to a request for comment. A lawyer for Sunlight Supply declined Thursday to comment on the case. The company has denied its products are responsible for the marijuana collective’s problems.
BT Collective filed papers Wednesday asking Burns to stay his order while they appeal the issue to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Jeffrey Lake, a prominent medical marijuana lawyer in San Diego who represents the collective, said the secrecy is necessary because both sides “should have the right to litigate a civil matter without fear of criminal prosecution.”
The case was initially filed in state court, Lake wrote in an email, but was moved to U.S. District Court by Sunlight Supply because federal courts have jurisdiction over cases between people or businesses in different states.
Lake said that move was part of Sunlight Supply’s legal strategy and raised a larger question — whether one side in a dispute “can take advantage of a conflict of laws by changing jurisdictions in order to subject an opposing party to potential criminal liability.”
Alex Kreit, a law professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, said the case illuminates the vexing position that medical marijuana providers are in.
“The difference between state and federal law puts those medical marijuana collectives in a tough position,” Kreit said.
Other businesses can go to court to settle a dispute, but medical marijuana collectives have to think twice because it may expose them to scrutiny by federal law enforcement, he said.
“Just the possibility of federal prosecution carries a lot of downsides,” Kreit said. “It makes it more difficult for the collectives to pursue remedies if they are defrauded or sold a defective product.” The conflict between state law that allows medical marijuana cultivation and federal law that does not and considers all marijuana to be an illegal drug is normally played out in criminal courts, Kreit said. Collectives and cooperatives operate knowing that federal prosecutors could take action against them.
Even so, the broad request for secrecy in this case was not warranted, said Peter Scheer, a lawyer and executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, an open government advocacy group in San Rafael. “My first thought is the judge is right,” Scheer said. “When you file a lawsuit, it is inherently a public matter, and there is good reason for that.”
Scheer posed a similar scenario of a lawsuit over the copyright to computer software that allows someone to avoid paying taxes.
“I don’t think you could go into court and expect the court to seal all the documents to protect you from the prying eyes of government authorities,” he said.
He also said because BT Collective’s suit is about an allegedly defective product the case could have broader interest for other businesses and the public. Keeping that information open is a crucial consideration, Scheer said.
At first glance, the lawsuit filed this year in federal court in downtown San Diego by BT Collective appears to be nothing more than a dispute over allegations that one business sold faulty products to another.
But a closer look shows the suit, a potential class-action case, is more than that — one where a pursuit for secrecy by both sides earned the ire of a federal judge and which illustrates the conflict between state and federal law over medical marijuana.
BT Collective is a medical marijuana operation in San Diego that opaquely describes itself in the lawsuit as a manufacturer of “natural and organic health care plant products.” It filed suit against Sunlight Supply, a Washington company that sells indoor gardening supplies, blaming the business for selling black flexible irrigation tubing that contains a toxin that ravaged and wiped out the collectives plants.
Last week, both sides requested to file under seal Sunlight Supply’s motion to dismiss the case, as well as all of its exhibits and any further legal briefs from either side.
The reason: The documents would touch on “sensitive matters pertaining to criminal liability due to differences between state and federal law.”
In other words, they would be talking about cultivating marijuana — legal under California’s medical marijuana law but illegal under federal law.
U.S. District Judge Larry A. Burns would have none of it. “BT Collective is more than welcome to bring this case against Sunlight Supply, but it cannot expect the Court to insulate it from the collateral consequences of doing so,” he wrote Tuesday.
In a sharply worded three-page order, Burns said the collective was trying to fly “under the radar of federal law enforcement.”
Earlier in the case, both sides agreed that the deposition of BT Collective CEO Travis Yost would be taken under seal, citing the same federal-state law concerns.
That request was granted by a different judge, but Burns wiped out that order, too, saying the deposition is not in the case file and the witnesses avoided any criminal issue by “vigorously asserting their Fifth Amendment rights in response to questioning.”
The collective now has two choices, Burns concluded. “One, it can litigate the case with total transparency and roll the dice that the United States does not file criminal charges against it,” he said. Or, it can drop the suit.
Yost did not respond to a request for comment. A lawyer for Sunlight Supply declined Thursday to comment on the case. The company has denied its products are responsible for the marijuana collective’s problems.
BT Collective filed papers Wednesday asking Burns to stay his order while they appeal the issue to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Jeffrey Lake, a prominent medical marijuana lawyer in San Diego who represents the collective, said the secrecy is necessary because both sides “should have the right to litigate a civil matter without fear of criminal prosecution.”
The case was initially filed in state court, Lake wrote in an email, but was moved to U.S. District Court by Sunlight Supply because federal courts have jurisdiction over cases between people or businesses in different states.
Lake said that move was part of Sunlight Supply’s legal strategy and raised a larger question — whether one side in a dispute “can take advantage of a conflict of laws by changing jurisdictions in order to subject an opposing party to potential criminal liability.”
Alex Kreit, a law professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, said the case illuminates the vexing position that medical marijuana providers are in.
“The difference between state and federal law puts those medical marijuana collectives in a tough position,” Kreit said.
Other businesses can go to court to settle a dispute, but medical marijuana collectives have to think twice because it may expose them to scrutiny by federal law enforcement, he said.
“Just the possibility of federal prosecution carries a lot of downsides,” Kreit said. “It makes it more difficult for the collectives to pursue remedies if they are defrauded or sold a defective product.” The conflict between state law that allows medical marijuana cultivation and federal law that does not and considers all marijuana to be an illegal drug is normally played out in criminal courts, Kreit said. Collectives and cooperatives operate knowing that federal prosecutors could take action against them.
Even so, the broad request for secrecy in this case was not warranted, said Peter Scheer, a lawyer and executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, an open government advocacy group in San Rafael. “My first thought is the judge is right,” Scheer said. “When you file a lawsuit, it is inherently a public matter, and there is good reason for that.”
Scheer posed a similar scenario of a lawsuit over the copyright to computer software that allows someone to avoid paying taxes.
“I don’t think you could go into court and expect the court to seal all the documents to protect you from the prying eyes of government authorities,” he said.
He also said because BT Collective’s suit is about an allegedly defective product the case could have broader interest for other businesses and the public. Keeping that information open is a crucial consideration, Scheer said.