Supreme Court – Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn

Background

In February 2012, Douglas J. Horn sustained injuries to his hip and right shoulder as a result of a car accident.

In his pursuit of natural remedies, he came across an advertisement for Dixie X CBD Dew Drops Tincture, promoting itself as containing 0% THC and adhering to federal regulations.

As a commercial truck driver who undergoes random drug testing, Horn took the time to thoroughly examine these claims prior to buying and using the product in October 2012.

Independent lab tests substantiated that Dixie X indeed contained THC, which contradicted the assertions made in the advertisement.

If Horn can establish that the defendants’ alleged racketeering activities have caused harm to his business or property, he stands to recover triple the damages for his lost wages along with attorney fees under a RICO claim. 

Personal injuries are not included under RICO laws.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York ruled in favor of the defense, determining that Horn’s injury was of a personal nature, and subsequently dismissed the lawsuit.

But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit disagreed back in 2023,

Supreme Court

23-365 MEDICAL MARIJUANA, INC. V. HORN
DECISION BELOW: 80 F.4th 130
CERT. GRANTED 4/29/2024

QUESTION PRESENTED:

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) creates a civil treble-damages action for “[a]ny person injured in his business or property by reason of” certain offenses. 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c).

The question presented is:

Whether economic harms resulting from personal injuries are injuries to “business or property by reason of” the defendant’s acts for purposes of civil RICO.

The Supreme Court case of Medical Marijuana Inc. v. Horn represents a significant legal confrontation regarding the regulation and commercialization of medical marijuana in the United States.

This case centers on the implications of state versus federal law (RICO) concerning the distribution and use of cannabis for medicinal purposes.

The questions have not been answered yet and information will be updated as it is discovered.

Here is a good article at Cannabis Business Times

For further reading on this pivotal case, please refer to the following sources:

• Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Horn (Oral Argument)
• Supreme Court Case Overview
• Google search for Medical Marijuana v Horn
• Cannabis Business Times

Oral Arguments

As always… Follow the money. If you can.

More Posts