Hey, there! Log in / Register

People who work in the marijuana industry in Massachusetts better keep their finances in good order, because a judge has ruled they can't file for bankruptcy

A judge in bankruptcy court in Boston has ruled a manager at a Massachusetts marijuana dispensary can't take advantage of federal bankruptcy laws because marijuana remains illegal under federal court.

In a ruling handed down earlier this month, US Bankruptcy Judge Elizabeth Katz ruled that by continuing to work at a marijuana company, the man's violation of federal law was so egregious she could not even approve a Chapter 13 bankruptcy repayment plan that relied on the earnings of the man's wife, who does not work in a federally forbidden business.

Katz noted that bankruptcy law requires debtors to show a "good faith" reason why they need to have some of their debts forgiven and others adjusted, and that nobody who is paid from the sales of an illegal substance can meet that requirement - and that in this case, that extended to the wife because the couple had commingled their finances.

The Debtor "has no constitutional or 'fundamental' right to a discharge in bankruptcy." Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 286 (1991). Here, the Debtor has not indicated any intention to forego his federal criminal activities while this case is pending, even if he proposed a plan to be funded solely by his spouse's income. The Court ... holds that it would be an abuse of process to permit the Debtor to obtain the protections and benefits of the federal bankruptcy laws while continuing to commit federal crimes. Accordingly, dismissal of this case is warranted pursuant to [federal bankruptcy law].

The judge added:

As reflected in the Debtor's Schedule I and the parties' stipulated facts, at the time the Debtor filed this case he worked in "sales" as a "budtender" for a retail dispensary of cannabis. According to Merriam-Webster.com, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/budtender (last visited January 17, 2023), a "budtender" is "a person who serves customers at an establishment where cannabis products are sold (such as a medical or recreational marijuana dispensary)." It is reasonable for the Court to infer that this means, at the time the case was filed, as part of his employment, the Debtor provided information about and sold cannabis products to customers. The Court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Debtor's actions during his employment selling cannabis as a budtender included distributing cannabis and possessing cannabis with intent to distribute cannabis (a controlled substance) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841, and possession of a controlled substance without a prescription in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 844(a). The Court also finds that as a budtender, the Debtor aided and abetted his employer, Green Star Herbal, in the unlawful distribution and possession of cannabis with intent to distribute, without a prescription, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2. Further, at the time the case was filed, the Court finds that the Debtor conspired with his employer to commit the crimes of distributing cannabis and possessing cannabis with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 846.

The request to deny him bankruptcy came from the trustee appointed by the court to oversee his case. The man argued that the trustee would not be overseeing an illegal activity, just the man's use of wages to pay his debts and that in any case, the federal appeals court in Boston had ruled last year, in a case involving a Maine law on ownership of marijuana businesses, that even marijuana producers could seek relief in federal court:

[T]he Debtor says that, given the marijuana industry's contribution to a wide spectrum of the Massachusetts economy, the Trustee's position would result in a large swath of the community - including the janitorial agency that cleans a dispensary, a pizza shop where dispensary employees get their lunch, Federal Express that delivers packages for a dispensary, the electric utility company, public schools, and perhaps even 2.3 million Walmart employees – being ineligible for bankruptcy relief because they derive an economic benefit from marijuana-related businesses. Instead, the Debtor contends that, based on the recent case of Ne. Patients Grp. v. United Cannabis Patients & Caregivers of Me., 45 F.4th 542 (1st Cir. 2022), where the First Circuit Court of Appeals held that Maine's restriction on cannabis business ownership to Maine residents was unconstitutional under the dormant Commerce Clause, engagement in cannabis-related activity is not a bar to obtaining relief in federal courts.

Katz wrote she didn't buy it:

The Court is unpersuaded by this "slippery slope" argument and does not need to and will not reach the question as to whether other employees, like a warehouse attendant or web designer for a marijuana dispensary, would be eligible for bankruptcy relief.

Via Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.

Topics: 
Free tagging: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Complete ruling923.55 KB


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Thanks again, RIchard Nixon, for this war on drugs. Really a gift that just keeps giving.

up
Voting closed 0

To every president since Nixon who has continued the war on drugs.

Every single one of them could/could have fixed this.

up
Voting closed 0

To every president since Nixon who has continued the war on drugs.

Every single one of them could/could have fixed this.

up
Voting closed 0

The guy is at least trying to pay his debts.

Just legalize it, ffs.

up
Voting closed 0

It feels like someone has an axe to grind here.

up
Voting closed 0

Anywhere on this planet where the government actually likes its citizens?

up
Voting closed 0

from someone who has to listen to every person with a complaint of every kind, and figure out a way to satisfy the needs of as many as possible. Like, that has to be a difficult job even if you want to do the best by people.

up
Voting closed 0

"You sold plants, starve to death" needs improvement.

up
Voting closed 0

Then the problem is they didn't sell enough plants. You oppose free markets?

Also, there's other jobs out there. You aren't assigned a business to work in at birth, you can work other places.

up
Voting closed 0

Government picking winners.

Bankruptcy protection for all, or bankruptcy protection for none.

up
Voting closed 0

Is opposition to the free market. You see, in the free market, if you don't cut it, you're gone. You really want the government.

up
Voting closed 0

Should cocaine traffickers be eligible for bankruptcy protection from their business debts? How about hitmen? Illegal gambling rings?

I'm fully supportive of legalized adult use cannabis. I voted for it here, I'd gladly support federal legalization. But right now, federal law says its illegal. How could a federal court court lawfully support a business that federal laws say are unlawful? The solution here is to change the laws to legalize a business that a majority of Americans would like to see legalized (and if you look at just legalizing medicinal use, all BUT ~10 % support legalizing.)

Citation for the stats: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/11/22/americans-overwhelmingl...

up
Voting closed 0

I seem to remember that marihuana dispensaries are not allowed to keep their profits in banks because all the banks are FDIC insured.

So does this ruling about federal bankruptcy of a marihuana dispensaries employee mean they are not allowed to keep their wages in banks as well?

I'm dazed and confused.

up
Voting closed 0

I could KIND OF see the logic if the business itself was applying for bankruptcy. But punishing all the random employees? People work for businesses breaking the law constantly. Should the mail room employees and janitors who worked for Enron have been barred from bankruptcy and unemployment because their employer was deriving money from criminal activity?

This feels personal on the part of the judge.

up
Voting closed 0