Following up on our posts on Washington Initiative 502, my colleague Claire Mitchell had the chance to speak with Colin O’Keefe of LXBN regarding the initiative and its implementation for businesses. In the brief interview, Claire explained the rulemaking by the Washington State Liquor Control Board currently underway and offered thoughts on what Washington’s marijuana industry may look like. 

Utah’s liquor control agency has changed its enforcement policy yet again. In an apparent about-face, the agency is returning to its prior policy, which requires evidence of an intent to dine before wait staff can serve drinks to restaurant patrons.  The agency’s head enforcement officer recently confirmed that compliance officers will not cite restaurants that

The Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) announced its tentative timeline for implementation of Initiative 502 (I-502) yesterday. WSLCB developed this timeline in order to keep the public informed and to identify significant milestones in the implementation process.

Rulemaking began in early December with the filing of CR101 for the Producer License, a notice of proposed rulemaking. WSLCB is still accepting

Utah’s liquor control agency has started citing restaurants that serve alcoholic drinks to patrons before they order food.  The agency has shifted policy to now strictly interpret a key provision of Utah’s Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, which provides:

            A full-service restaurant licensee may not sell, offer for sale, or furnish an alcoholic product except in

As we pointed out in our post “Understanding the Conflict Between Federal Law and Washington Initiative 502,” possession and sale of marijuana remains illegal under federal law even as states push to legalize marijuana for medical or recreational use. We quoted Jenny Durkan, the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington, as stating that the U.S. Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) “responsibility to enforce the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged” in the face of state initiatives like Washington Initiative 502, that legalized the possession of certain amounts of marijuana. 

Adam Nagourny of the New York Times reported today on the sobering case of Matthew R. Davies, who was indicted last July on federal charges of cultivating marijuana, following a DOJ raid on two dispensaries and a warehouse filled with nearly 2,000 marijuana plants that Davies owned and operated. Davies reportedly saw a big business opportunity after California legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes. “We thought, this is an industry in its infancy, it’s a heavy cash business, it’s basically being used by people who use it to cloak illegal activity,” Nagourny quotes Davies as saying. “Nobody was doing it the right way. We thought we could make a model of how this should be done.”Continue Reading A Cautionary Tale in the Conflict Between Federal and State Law Over Marijuana Legalization

Today, the Washington State Liquor Control Board (WSLCB) issued a few updates on the implementation process for Initiative 502 (I-502), the marijuana reform law that recently passed in November 2012.

Specifically, WSLCB announced that it plans to hold evening forums in six locations across Washington. These forums present an opportunity for the public to meet

In Part I of our “Understanding Washington Initiative 502” (“I-502”) series, we described how I-502’s licensing regime is scheduled to go into effect late next year. There is no question that I-502 legalizes possession of certain amounts of marijuana under Washington law, and the state licensing structure aimed at regulating the production, distribution, and retail sale of marijuana reflects this fact. But as a Schedule I drug subject to the federal Controlled Substances Act (“Act”), possession and sale of marijuana remains illegal under federal law. I-502 does not change this basic fact, regardless of whether the Washington State Liquor Control Board succeeds in establishing the rigorous regulatory regime envisioned by I-502. 

I-502 intends to establish a well-regulated market that will allow Washington state to tax a commodity that had been pushed into the underground economy. Achieving that goal depends on capital investments in the regulated marijuana market in Washington State. But will investors be willing to fund a marijuana start-up if federal law diverges significantly from state law – particularly when federal law includes criminal sanctions? That will depend on the federal government’s response to states like Washington and Colorado that have chosen to de-criminalize marijuana.Continue Reading Part II: Understanding the Conflict Between Federal Law and Washington Initiative 502

Litigation concerning the direct shipment of wine has garnered a significant amount of attention in the years since the United States Supreme Court’s seminal decision in Granholm v. Heald. Generally speaking, these disputes have played out in the federal courts, far removed from the typical family winery.

Although direct shipment will remain an important issue both for wineries and for the attorneys who represent them—indeed, it is one of the topics covered in Stoel Rives’ Law of Wine treatise—a winery’s long-term financial success may be just as likely to hinge on the outcomes of lower-profile controversies litigated in front of local government bodies. Depending on the state and locality, these local governments may have the power to prohibit the construction of new tasting rooms or restaurants—a growing source of revenue for many wineries1 —or to regulate the number and character of marketing events held by a winery.Continue Reading As Wine Industry Evolves, Local Regulation Remains King

My colleague Wendy Goffe, a trusts and estates attorney in our Seattle office and a regular contributor to Forbes, wrote a fascinating article about Washington Initiative 502 (I-502), the marijuana reform law. As those of you who haven’t been sleeping under a rock already know, the initiative appeared on the November 2012 General Ballot

Today, the Washington State Liquor Control Board issued its notice of proposed rulemaking to inform stakeholders that the agency is in the initial stage of drafting rules to implement marijuana “producer” licenses and their requirements under Initiative 502. The Initiative was passed by Washington voters earlier this year. During this stage of the rulemaking process