The Detroit News reviews……Michigan Court of Claims Judge Christopher Murray has lifted a portion of the state’s widespread marijuana recall, saying a phase of it was “in all likelihood based upon an arbitrary decision.”
On Nov. 17, the Marijuana Regulatory Agency recalled merchandise examined by Viridis Laboratories and Viridis North due to allegedly “inaccurate and/or unreliable results of products tested.”
Viridis Laboratories, which mentioned the recall affected about 60% to 70% of the state’s on-shelf cannabis merchandise, sued, contending the transfer by the state was “unjustified, prejudiced and retaliatory.”
Murray’s opinion Friday mentioned the regulatory company relied on retesting of product examined at Viridis, which is positioned in Lansing, however not Viridis North, which is positioned in Bay City.
“Yet, the recall bulletin expressly states in the primary sentence that the MRA ‘has identified inaccurate and/or unreliable results of products tested by safety compliance facilities Viridis North, LLC and Viridis Laboratories, LLC.’” Murray wrote. “As to Viridis North, that does not appear to be accurate, as everyone has agreed that no samples from Veridis (sic) North were included in the random samples re-tested prior to the recall, and which in part led to the recall.”
Murray blocked the state’s recall because it pertains to Viridis North however allowed it to proceed for Viridis as additional litigation continues.
The judge acknowledged the Marijuana Regulatory Agency “undoubtedly” believes the recall of each Viridis and Viridis North was obligatory to shield the general public.
The firm applauded the choice in a press release, saying it struck down “approximately half” of the state’s recall.
“While we maintain that the entire recall was completely without merit, we applaud the Court for at least reversing the MRA’s faulty decision to recall products tested at Viridis Bay City,” mentioned Kevin Blair, an lawyer with Honigman. “This ill-advised recall has caused irreparable harm not only to Viridis but to growers, retailers and consumers throughout the state.”
The laboratories declare the recall affected 64,000 kilos of flower valued at retail costs at over $229 million.