Two medical marijuana companies that have filed suit against the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission allege that AMCC commissioners and/or staff colluded with one or more of the applicant companies, according to legal filings filed Tuesday in the lawsuit. The company appears to believe it improperly influenced the licensing process. .
The filing, filed by Insa Alabama and Alabama Always in a joint lawsuit against AMCC, lists numerous questions the companies want AMCC to answer and documents and materials they want AMCC to produce. .
The production comes in response to an order issued by Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge James Anderson, who last week ordered that the licensing process for the complex should be halted again and that the plaintiff companies be given $6. It ruled that it had the right to fire people and make a number of demands. You will need to ask for documentation and submit a number of questions that you will have to answer.
AMCC called on Mr. Anderson to reconsider his decision, arguing that the order was not consistent with legal process for public meeting complaints. Anderson on Tuesday set a hearing date for Thursday morning to address AMCC's motion, which includes a threat to appeal the judge's decision.
As part of Tuesday's filing, Insa and Alabama Always asked the AMCC in its initial inquiry whether any AMCC commissioner, employee, or agent formally communicated with the applicant or his or her representative in connection with the scoring. They are asking him to acknowledge that he had a conversation outside of a formal meeting. /Voting/Ranking process. In the next question, the plaintiffs ask AMCC to admit that its staff encouraged one or more commissioners to vote for a particular applicant.
These questions are consistent with allegations that lawyers for the plaintiff companies have hinted at in interviews, court filings and hearings in recent months. These allegations center on a rigged process that was intentionally flawed because it was improperly manipulated behind the scenes.
Although such charges are typically lumped together as conspiracy theories, the bizarre occurrences, bizarre mistakes, inexplicable decisions, and violations of laws and regulations that have made them so important have given rise to them.
These never-ending problems have also baffled some AMCC commissioners. Two sources close to the committee said that as staff and lawyers scrambled this week to challenge Mr. Anderson's deposition and discovery order, some members were instead pursuing legal proceedings to raise questions. He said he wanted answers.
“They're tired of participating in a process where their integrity is being questioned and believe that if they have nothing to hide, there's no reason why depositions can't take place,” one source said. Ta.
At least three commissioners are pushing back against the lawsuit, sources said, and are taking special exception to the high court's threat to appeal Monday's discovery order against Mr. Anderson.
The document request filed Tuesday lists a large number of records, including all communications between commissioners and staff and third parties related to the scoring/ranking process.
The court set a January 19 deadline to submit all materials and complete all depositions. Meanwhile, the state's medical marijuana licensing process is once again at an impasse.
