Following a recent Appellate Division decision, NJ can now resume the process to approve up to 24 additional licenses for new medical cannabis dispensaries…
New Jersey’s process for approving new medical cannabis dispensaries (also known as alternative treatment centers or ATCs) has been on hold for more than a year. Following a recent Appellate Division decision, the state can now resume the process to approve up to 24 additional licenses. Given that medical cannabis dispensaries will likely be the first to sell recreational legal cannabis, the court ruling is good news for New Jersey’s medical and recreational cannabis industry.
Lawsuits Challenging ATC License Application Process
New Jersey’s Medicinal Marijuana Program (MMP) has struggled to reach its full potential. To date, New Jersey has issued only 12 vertically integrated medical marijuana licenses. Just 10 are currently operational, leading to significant supply shortages. In 2019, the New Jersey Department of Health requested applications for 24 new licenses, including 4 vertically integrated, 5 stand-alone cultivation facilities, and 15 dispensaries. It received a total of 196 applications before the application round closed in August of 2019.
The application review process came to a halt when several applicants filed suit after receiving a preliminary denial from the NJDOH. The NJDOH rejected applications submitted electronically by several applicants because it could not open the attached files. The NJDOH also rejected applications from several others because they were not timely submitted. Additionally, the NJDOH rejected the applications of five others because they were found to be unresponsive on one or more criteria set forth in the Request for Applications (2019 RFA).
The ATC applicants’ suits alleged that the NJDOH made numerous errors in its initial screening of entities to operate ATCs to grow, process, and dispense medical marijuana. Among other arguments, the applicants argued that the NJDOH’s decision to disqualify them was arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable because of file corruption problems with required documents. According to the applicants, the agency’s systems were to blame for corrupting the files rather than their own user error.
The Appellate Division granted the applicants a stay that suspended the NJDOH’s review of the other applications received in response to the 2019 RFA while the lawsuits worked their way through the legal system. Accordingly, the NJDOH has not yet evaluated any of the applications that were deemed eligible for scoring.
Court Gives Green Light to Consider 2019 RFA Applications
With the exception of the claims raised by one applicant, the Appellate Division sided with the NJDOH.
The Appellate Division rejected arguments that the NJDOJ acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably in failing to excuse appellants’ inability to timely file complete and uncorrupted applications. In support, it highlighted that the RFA repeatedly stated that submission deadlines were “absolute” and that failure to submit a complete application by the relevant deadline would result in disqualification. The court further noted that a webinar and FAQ document provided by the NJDOH regarding the RFA submission process also advised that applicants took on full responsibility for submitting timely applications.
“Tellingly, the Department responded to a question about how applicants could ‘gain confidence’ that an application had been received ‘in its entirety as originally sent,’ by repeating that applicants ‘assume sole responsibility for the complete effort involved in the application submission,’ thereby conveying that any difficulties with electronic submission would not excuse lateness or incompleteness,” the Appellate Division wrote.
The Appellate Division found that the application of one applicant, ZY Labs LLC, should not have been disqualified and may proceed to the scoring phase of the NJDOH review process. According to the court, proof of community approval alone, without proof of governing municipal body approval, was sufficient to avoid disqualification.
Additional Lawsuit Challenging Scoring Criteria
The NJDOH’s 2018 RFA also faced legal challenges, which the Appellate Division decided in November. While the ATC applicants in the suits challenging the 2019 RFA raised issues with the NJDOH’s compliance review of Part A of the application, the ATC applicants challenging the 2018 RFA contested the manner in which the NJDOH scored certain applications as to the Part B criteria.
The Appellate Division agreed that the scoring system employed by the NJDOH produced “arbitrary results,” which it failed to explain. “[W]e have considerable concerns about the Department’s processes and the results produced that – without further agency proceedings and explanation – would leave us to conclude that the decisions in question are arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable,” the court wrote. The Appellate Division did not order the NJDOH to approve the challenged applications, but rather remanded them back to the agency. At this point, it is unclear what changes the NJDOH may make to the application scoring procedures to address the court’s concerns.
Lessons for Prospective Cannabis Licensees
Applying to become an ATC or a recreational cannabis licensee is not an easy process. As highlighted by the Appellate Division’s recent decision, it is imperative to understand and comply with all of the regulatory requirements, which may be set forth in statutes, regulations, agency guidance, and even FAQs. Because failing to do so may doom your application, wasting both time and money, we encourage all businesses to work with an experienced cannabis attorney who can help you navigate the system.
If you have questions, please contact us
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Dan McKillop, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
This article is a part of a series pertaining to cannabis legalization in New Jersey and the United States at large. Prior articles in this series are below:
Disclaimer: Possession, use, distribution, and/or sale of cannabis is a Federal crime and is subject to related Federal policy. Legal advice provided by Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is designed to counsel clients regarding the validity, scope, meaning, and application of existing and/or proposed cannabis law. Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC will not provide assistance in circumventing Federal or state cannabis law or policy, and advice provided by our office should not be construed as such.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Is It Easy to Become a NJ Cannabis Dispensary?
Author: Daniel T. McKillop
Following a recent Appellate Division decision, NJ can now resume the process to approve up to 24 additional licenses for new medical cannabis dispensaries…
New Jersey’s process for approving new medical cannabis dispensaries (also known as alternative treatment centers or ATCs) has been on hold for more than a year. Following a recent Appellate Division decision, the state can now resume the process to approve up to 24 additional licenses. Given that medical cannabis dispensaries will likely be the first to sell recreational legal cannabis, the court ruling is good news for New Jersey’s medical and recreational cannabis industry.
Lawsuits Challenging ATC License Application Process
New Jersey’s Medicinal Marijuana Program (MMP) has struggled to reach its full potential. To date, New Jersey has issued only 12 vertically integrated medical marijuana licenses. Just 10 are currently operational, leading to significant supply shortages. In 2019, the New Jersey Department of Health requested applications for 24 new licenses, including 4 vertically integrated, 5 stand-alone cultivation facilities, and 15 dispensaries. It received a total of 196 applications before the application round closed in August of 2019.
The application review process came to a halt when several applicants filed suit after receiving a preliminary denial from the NJDOH. The NJDOH rejected applications submitted electronically by several applicants because it could not open the attached files. The NJDOH also rejected applications from several others because they were not timely submitted. Additionally, the NJDOH rejected the applications of five others because they were found to be unresponsive on one or more criteria set forth in the Request for Applications (2019 RFA).
The ATC applicants’ suits alleged that the NJDOH made numerous errors in its initial screening of entities to operate ATCs to grow, process, and dispense medical marijuana. Among other arguments, the applicants argued that the NJDOH’s decision to disqualify them was arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable because of file corruption problems with required documents. According to the applicants, the agency’s systems were to blame for corrupting the files rather than their own user error.
The Appellate Division granted the applicants a stay that suspended the NJDOH’s review of the other applications received in response to the 2019 RFA while the lawsuits worked their way through the legal system. Accordingly, the NJDOH has not yet evaluated any of the applications that were deemed eligible for scoring.
Court Gives Green Light to Consider 2019 RFA Applications
With the exception of the claims raised by one applicant, the Appellate Division sided with the NJDOH.
The Appellate Division rejected arguments that the NJDOJ acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably in failing to excuse appellants’ inability to timely file complete and uncorrupted applications. In support, it highlighted that the RFA repeatedly stated that submission deadlines were “absolute” and that failure to submit a complete application by the relevant deadline would result in disqualification. The court further noted that a webinar and FAQ document provided by the NJDOH regarding the RFA submission process also advised that applicants took on full responsibility for submitting timely applications.
“Tellingly, the Department responded to a question about how applicants could ‘gain confidence’ that an application had been received ‘in its entirety as originally sent,’ by repeating that applicants ‘assume sole responsibility for the complete effort involved in the application submission,’ thereby conveying that any difficulties with electronic submission would not excuse lateness or incompleteness,” the Appellate Division wrote.
The Appellate Division found that the application of one applicant, ZY Labs LLC, should not have been disqualified and may proceed to the scoring phase of the NJDOH review process. According to the court, proof of community approval alone, without proof of governing municipal body approval, was sufficient to avoid disqualification.
Additional Lawsuit Challenging Scoring Criteria
The NJDOH’s 2018 RFA also faced legal challenges, which the Appellate Division decided in November. While the ATC applicants in the suits challenging the 2019 RFA raised issues with the NJDOH’s compliance review of Part A of the application, the ATC applicants challenging the 2018 RFA contested the manner in which the NJDOH scored certain applications as to the Part B criteria.
The Appellate Division agreed that the scoring system employed by the NJDOH produced “arbitrary results,” which it failed to explain. “[W]e have considerable concerns about the Department’s processes and the results produced that – without further agency proceedings and explanation – would leave us to conclude that the decisions in question are arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable,” the court wrote. The Appellate Division did not order the NJDOH to approve the challenged applications, but rather remanded them back to the agency. At this point, it is unclear what changes the NJDOH may make to the application scoring procedures to address the court’s concerns.
Lessons for Prospective Cannabis Licensees
Applying to become an ATC or a recreational cannabis licensee is not an easy process. As highlighted by the Appellate Division’s recent decision, it is imperative to understand and comply with all of the regulatory requirements, which may be set forth in statutes, regulations, agency guidance, and even FAQs. Because failing to do so may doom your application, wasting both time and money, we encourage all businesses to work with an experienced cannabis attorney who can help you navigate the system.
If you have questions, please contact us
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Dan McKillop, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
This article is a part of a series pertaining to cannabis legalization in New Jersey and the United States at large. Prior articles in this series are below:
Disclaimer: Possession, use, distribution, and/or sale of cannabis is a Federal crime and is subject to related Federal policy. Legal advice provided by Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is designed to counsel clients regarding the validity, scope, meaning, and application of existing and/or proposed cannabis law. Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC will not provide assistance in circumventing Federal or state cannabis law or policy, and advice provided by our office should not be construed as such.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
