Colorado Health Law Blog

Home/Colorado Health Law Blog

Colorado Jury Rules in Favor of Marijuana Grow Business in Federal RICO Lawsuit

By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On November 14, 2018, a federal jury in Denver rejected claims involving the odor that was allegedly coming from a pot farm. This was a case that was being closely watched by the marijuana industry. The marijuana business had been sued for damages to neighboring property value under anti-racketeering laws.

A Closely Watched Lawsuit.

This was an important suit for the marijuana industry because it was the first federal suit brought under federal anti-racketeering laws. If the lawsuit had been successful, it could have created a new blueprint for opponents of marijuana legalization to dismantle the industry through civil cases under RICO laws.

The couple who own and live on land adjacent to the grow facility said the facility damaged their property values because of noise and odor. Because it harmed their views, and because no one wants to live near illegal activity, they claimed damages of $1 million.

The grow facility argued during trial that it didn’t cause any odor; its odor-control system doesn’t vent outdoors.

After a short deliberation, the jury ruled in favor of the marijuana grow facility and found it was not responsible for any of the alleged damages. Attorneys that represent similar marijuana facilities said proving property damages in cases like these are very difficult and hope the outcome of this case will deter others from trying the same. Click here to read more on this case.

Click here to read one of my prior blogs on this case.

It is unclear to me why the Plaintiffs in this case prosecuted the case under a RICO theory since such a cause of action is usually very difficult to prove. However, I am not aware of all the facts of the case. It seems to me that a simple suit for nuisance against the marijuana grow farm would have been easier to prove and obtain an injunction on.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys for Medical Marijuana Concerns.

The Health Law Firm attorneys can assist health care providers and facilities, such as doctors, pharmacists and pharmacies, wanting to participate in the medical marijuana industry. We can properly draft and complete the applications for registration, permitting and/or licensing, while complying with Florida law. We can also represent doctors, pharmacies and pharmacists facing proceedings brought by state regulators or agencies.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Foody, Kathleen. “Colorado Lawsuit Could Ripple Through US Cannabis Industry.” Health News Florida. (October 30, 2018). Web.

Ingold, John. “Jury finds in favor of Colorado marijuana grow in closely watched federal lawsuit.” The Colorado Sun. (November 18, 2018). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Growing marijuana industry, marijuana defense attorney, medical marijuana defense attorney, lawyer for medical marijuana growers and distributors, health lawyers for marijuana distributors, complex health care litigation attorney, federal medical litigation attorney, legal counsel for marijuana growers and distributors, medical marijuana laws, marijuana laws, medical marijuana legalization, recreational marijuana laws and regulations, legal representation for recreational marijuana in a business, legal counsel for marijuana law, marijuana law attorney, legal representation for marijuana decriminalization, legal representation for marijuana regulations, legal representation for U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) investigations, DOJ investigation attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm, complex medical business litigation lawyer, professional license dfense attorney, medical marijuana license defense lawyer

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2018 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

ECFMG Affidavit to Complete? Attending a Caribbean Medical School? Being Investigated for Irregular behavior by the ECFMG or USMLE? You need Legal Advice! Your Residency Matching Might Now Be at Issue, as Well!

By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

Have you recently unexpectedly received an affidavit from the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG or the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Secretariat? Are you attending or have you graduated from a Caribbean medical School such as the University of Science, Art and Technology (USAT), Faculty of Medicine, in Montserrat, or the Atlantic University School of Medicine (AUSOM) in St. Lucia? Then you are probably, unknowingly, being investigated for misconduct, improprieties in your medical school attendance or other “irregular behavior.” You need to consult with a lawyer and specifically a lawyer who knows and understands the processes followed by the ECFMG and the USMLE.

Large Number of Legal Inquiries Being Received from Current Students and Graduates of USAT.

A year ago, our firm was receiving a large number of calls from students and graduates of the Atlantic University School of Medicine (AUSOM) concerning inquiries and letters they were receiving from the ECFMG and/or the USMLE. However, over the past several months, we have now received an even larger number of inquiries from students and alumni of the University of Arts, Technology and Sciences (USAT) Faculty of Medicine in Montserrat. We have now seen several different affidavits which the ECF image he has sent to students and graduates of USAT which request some very specific and detailed information about their course attendance and experience as students at USAT.

Each inquiry we have received from students and graduates of USAT has disclosed facts and circumstances that are slightly different from the other. From these we have been able to piece together a fairly comprehensive picture of what is probably going on. To summarize, it appears that you SAT is under investigation by the ECF image he for the various irregularities that our clients have disclosed have occurred in the past.

Affidavits from the ECFMG and the USMLE Should Be Taken Very Seriously. They Should Be Answered Truthfully and Must Be Returned Promptly.

The Handbook and Guidelines published by the ECFMG and the USMLE, require that any student or graduate who applies for their services must promptly respond to requests for information. This would include responding to the affidavits (which are really questionnaires to be completed under oath). Otherwise, the applicant can be charged by the ECFMG or the USMLE with “irregular behavior” in accordance with the Handbook and Guidelines that they previously agreed to follow when initially applying.

We hear from our callers, clients, and potential clients that they may have received instructions from their schools or from other sources that they do not have to do send these affidavits back in or respond to these requests for information. We do not believe that this is correct and vice. If confronted by having been sent such an inquiry or affidavit by the USEMLE or ECFMG, you should immediately contact competent, experienced, legal counsel to advise you on the exact issues and facts of the situation. You will only receive advice that takes your own personal interests into consideration from your own personal attorney; you are not likely to receive it from anyone else.

View Our Other Blogs on Our Experience with the USMLE, ECFMG, and NBME, and Hearings on “Irregular Behavior.”

Our law firm is had a great deal of experience representing students and graduates in disputes with and defending charges of “irregular behavior” against the USMLE, ECFMG and he NBME. To review a few of these please see:
What to Do If You Receive an Inquiry From the USMLE, ECFMG, or NBME
GOING TO TAKE THE USMLE STEP EXAMS? BEWARE OF ACTIONS THAT CAN BE CALLED “IRREGULAR BEHAVIOR”-PART 1, and
Accused of Irregular Behavior on the USMLE? Here’s What You Will Do Wrong.

Contact a Health Care Attorney Experienced in the Representation of Medical Students, Interns, Residents and Applicants, Fellows and Those Involved in Graduate Medical Education.

The Health Law Firm and its attorneys represent interns, residents, fellows and medical school students in disputes with their medical schools, supervisors, residency programs and in dismissal hearings. We have experience representing such individuals and those in graduate medical education programs in various disputes regarding their academic and clinical performance, allegations of substance abuse, failure to complete integral parts training, alleged false or incomplete statements on applications, allegations of impairment (because of abuse or addiction to drugs or alcohol or because of mental or physical issues), because of discrimination due to race, sex, national origin, sexual orientation and any other matters.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620

KeyWords: Graduate medical education (GME) defense attorney, international medical graduate attorney, graduate medical education defense lawyer, lawyer for medical students, medical resident physician attorney, residency program legal dispute, residency program litigation, medical school litigation, legal representation for medical residents, legal dispute with medical school, medical students legal counsel, disruptive physician attorney, impaired medical student legal counsel, impaired resident legal defense attorney, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) defense lawyer, USMLE defense attorney, National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) defense counsel, Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG) defense lawyer, ECFMG defense attorney, legal representation for USMLE investigations, legal representation for NBME investigations, legal representation for irregular behavior, irregular behavior defense attorney, irregular behavior defense counsel, health law attorney, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys, Philadelphia attorney for ECFMG hearing, Philadelphia lawyer for NBME hearing, Philadelphia legal counsel for USMLE hearing

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2018 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida’s Medical Marijuana Once Again Threatened by Unnecessary Legal Setbacks

By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

The resignation of Florida’s medical marijuana chief on August 17, 2018, and a series of recent court losses, has once again threatened the state’s efforts for controlled legalization of marijuana.

On August 2, 2018, a Tallahassee judge struck down the licensing structure that the state Legislature and Department of Health (DOH) enacted for medical marijuana providers. In his order, Circuit Judge Charles Dodson said the state’s imposition of a cap on the number of medical marijuana treatment centers and its requirement for vertical integration from growing to dispensing “directly contradicts” a 2016 amendment to the Florida Constitution.

“Implementing” the Law or Impeding the Law?

In 2014, the Florida Legislature took the first step toward a sane approach to marijuana by legalizing a non-euphoric strain, known as Charlotte’s Web.

In November 2016, Amendment 2 to the Florida Constitution, legalizing medical marijuana, passed with 71 percent approval, its authorization for medical use. However, since that happened, state officials, state bureaucrats and the state legislature have done nothing but attempt to restrict and impede its use, ignoring the will of the people they are supposed to be serving.

The legislature passed an “implementing” law for the amendment in 2017, but the rule-making process and initial rollout has been slow and bogged down by complex litigation. To read more on the law, click here.

Attempts to artificially limit the number of growers, the number of dispensaries, and the forms that are legal to use, have all been used to impede implementation.

Such herculean efforts by state bureaucrats and legislatures, who are supposed to be carrying out the will of the citizens, is unconscionable. Even when the Florida Constitution itself requires them to preform certain duties, they just obstruct, obstruct, obstruct. Thank goodness for conscientious judges like Judge Dodson, who honor the law, follow the law, and will hopefully help enforce the law, regardless of the politics of those who chose to ignore and impede it.

This just shows that future constitutional amendments concerning the legalization of marijuana and marijuana products, and I am sure nothing less than additional constitutional amendments will be required, will need to state that they are self-implementing and no act of the state legislature or rule of any state agency is required carry it out. In fact, any such future constitutional amendment should specifically prohibit them from interfering with its implementation.

Ongoing Legal Battles.

With the recent rulings rejecting a smoking ban and saying a cancer patient can grow his own plants, experts fear that Judge Dodson’s August ruling will drastically alter the current landscape. Lawyers, who specialize in the field of marijuana law, say this ruling has the greatest potential impact of any decision to date. Additionally, banking and money issues, litigation and politics have continued to shake up the outcome.

Thanks for attorney John Morgan and other advocates who take up and challenge the attempts to fight the will of the people of Florida. During the next election, marijuana advocates should run advertisements specifically targeting those officials who enacted legislation or who attempted to enact agency rules placing obstacles to implementing the constitutional amendment.

What Outcome is Best for the State of Florida?

The state of Florida has the potential to become one of the nation’s largest markets for medical marijuana, likely worth billions of dollars. It has the third-largest population, which is growing and features a large number of elderly residents, lawyers noted. So, when it comes to medical marijuana, the question remains, “What is best for the state of Florida in the long run?”

To learn more on the status of Florida’s marijuana legalization, click here to read one of my prior blogs. Be sure to check our Marijuana Law Blog regularly for updates.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys for Medical Marijuana Concerns.

The Health Law Firm attorneys can assist health care providers and facilities, such as doctors, pharmacists and pharmacies, wanting to participate in the medical marijuana industry. We can properly draft and complete the applications for registration, permitting and/or licensing, while complying with Florida law. We can also represent doctors, pharmacies and pharmacists facing proceedings brought by state regulators or agencies.

To contact the Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Hale, Nathan. “Fla. Medical Marijuana Measure May Boost Business For Firms.” Law360. (October 25, 2016). Web.

Hale, Nathan. “Setbacks Shake Up Fla.’s Medical Marijuana Rollout.” Law360. (August 17, 2018). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Florida medical marijuana legislation, medical marijuana representation, marijuana attorney, medical marijuana lawyer, marijuana defense attorney, legal representation for medical marijuana issues, Florida marijuana law attorney, marijuana law defense lawyer, representation for marijuana growers, representation for marijuana distributors, defense attorney for marijuana growers, defense attorney for marijuana distributors, defense lawyer for medical marijuana, decriminalization of marijuana in Florida, health law defense attorney, Florida medical cannabis representation, medical cannabis lawyer, cannabis defense lawyer, medical marijuana defense attorney, health lawyers for marijuana distributors, legal counsel for marijuana growers and distributors, medical marijuana laws, medical marijuana legalization, recreational marijuana laws and regulations, legal representation for recreational marijuana in a business, legal counsel for marijuana law, legal representation for marijuana criminalization, legal representation for marijuana regulations, The Health Law Firm reviews, reviews of The Health Law Firm attorneys

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2018 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida Gets a Green Light on First Five Growers as Medical Marijuana Program Expands: Five Pot Growers Hit Jackpot

By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

The Florida Department of Health (DOH) awarded the state’s first licenses to five nurseries, allowing them to legally grow and cultivate marijuana for medical purposes. The nurseries selected are Costa Nursery Farms in Miami, Alpha Foliage of Homestead, Knox Nursery of Winter Garden, Hackney Nursery Company in Tallahassee and Chestnut Hill Tree Farm of Alachua.

Compassionate Use in Florida.

With these licenses, the five nurseries are permitted to grow Charlotte’s Web, a liquid form of cannabis low in THC, the chemical that gives a euphoric feeling. It is intended to treat patients with epilepsy and advanced stages of cancer. For patients to qualify for the treatment, they must obtain permission from a qualified doctor and be added to the Compassionate Use Registry. Compassionate use is the experimental use of a medical product that has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). To read more about compassionate use and the registry from The DOH, click here.


Applicant Rules and Guidelines.

The five nurseries were selected out of a pool of 28 applicants with businesses in Florida for at least 30 years that grow a minimum of 400,000 plants. Each of the growers now have 10 business days to post a $5 million performance bond to prove they are serious about the license. Several nurseries that were selected have partnered with consultants, investors, security firms and out of state marijuana growers to help develop plans and secure the performance bond.

Expanding the Medical Marijuana Program.

Medical Marijuana is well on its way to Florida and these first five growers are just the beginning. A Florida House Panel recently approved House Bill 307, to expand the small medical marijuana program. Under this Bill, terminally ill patients can purchase marijuana from a licensed grower with approval from two doctors. Not only did the House Justice Subcommittee approve House Bill 307 by a 9-4 vote, they tacked on new language to increase the number of growers to 20. The bill passed its first hurdle and moves next to the House Health Care Appropriations Subcommittee. To find out more details on House Bill 307, click here.

To read further on Medical Marijuana legislation in Florida, read one of our past blogs here.

Serious Questions Regarding Monopolistic Actions.

I have some very serious questions as to whether or not the state is unfairly limiting the number of medical marijuana growers. Surely there is a need for more than five of them. This has got to be perceived as capricious and arbitrary by any court reviewing it.

If the proposed Florida constitutional amendment passes during the next election, as many predict it will, then such an artificial limitation on the number of growers may well be determined to violate the intent of the amendment. With all of the scrutiny being focused on state medical agencies by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) for anti-competitive practices, the artificially low number of permitted growers is found to invite future litigation from pateints and from competing growers who were shut out of the market.

Comments?

What are your thoughts on the availability of medical marijuana in Florida? Do you agree with the expansion of the medical marijuana program? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys for Medical Marijuana Concerns.

The Health Law Firm attorneys can assist health care providers and facilities, such as doctors, pharmacists and pharmacies, wanting to participate in the medical marijuana industry. We can properly draft and complete the applications for registration, permitting and/or licensing, while complying with Florida law. We can also represent doctors, pharmacies and pharmacists facing proceedings brought by state regulators or agencies.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

Sources:

Auslen, Michael. “Florida medical marijuana plan expanded to 20 growers.” Bradenton Herald. 17 Nov. 2015. Web.

Klas, Mary Ellen. “Florida approves 5 nurseriers to grow medical marijuana.” Miami Herald. 24 Nov. 2015. Web.

Powers, Scott. “5 growers get state’s 1st pot license.” Orlando Sentinel. 24 Nov. 2015. Print.

KeyWords: Florida medical marijuana, medical marijuana growers, medical marijuana cultivation, medical marijuana license, Charlotte’s Web, House Bill 307, medical marijuana lawyer, marijuana attorney, low-THC cannabis, medical cannabis, Department of Health (DOH), Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act, medical marijuana regulations, medical license defense attorney, The Health Law Firm, health law attorney, cannabis for treatment of debilitating medical condition

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

DEA Nixes Removing Marijuana From Its Highly Restricted Drug Classification

George Indest HeadshotBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On August 11, 2016, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) denied a petition to lessen federal restrictions on the use of marijuana for the fourth consecutive time. The DEA rejected petitions to remove marijuana from its most highly restricted classification of drugs, which includes heroin and ecstasy, but announced a new policy to support expanded research into the substance.

The Federal Status of Marijuana.

Reclassifying marijuana from a Schedule 1 to a Schedule 2 drug would have made it easier to get federal approval for studies of its uses as well as for doctors to start writing prescriptions for medical marijuana-based treatments. Additionally, the current federal status of marijuana makes it impossible for state-legal marijuana businesses to take the same tax deductions afforded to other business. Federal restrictions also make banks reluctant to work with marijuana businesses, leading many of them to become all-cash operations — with all the risks that entails.

The acting head of the DEA, Chuck Rosenburg, stated that “it has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision and a high potential for abuse.”

Marijuana for Scientific Research.

In a proposal issued on the same day, the DEA said that it will allow universities and private companies to grow marijuana for scientific research. Despite this, the DEA says it cannot change the legal status of marijuana unless the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determines it has a clear medical use. However, the FDA cannot determine it has a medical use in part because of the highly restrictive legal status of the drug. It’s a classic catch-22.

To read more on the status of medical marijuana, click here to read one of my prior blogs.

Stop Perpetuating the Insanity.

Like Yosarian said in the novel Catch 22, a novel about the absurdities and contradictions inherent in large government bureaucracy: “That’s some catch, that ‘catch 22.’ ” And the DEA is helping to perpetuate it. It’s difficult to understand how states can be legalizing medical marijuana, authorizing doctors to write prescriptions for it and issuing licenses to medical marijuana growers, if the DEA keeps it on its Schedule 1. Yeah, it’s right up there with heroin and PCP, isn’t it? My question is why aren’t cigarettes and chewing tobacco on that schedule? Someone needs to wake up and smell the coffee (or the ganja smoke)!

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys for Medical Marijuana Concerns.

The Health Law Firm attorneys can assist health care providers and facilities, such as doctors, pharmacists and pharmacies, wanting to participate in the medical marijuana industry. We can properly draft and complete the applications for registration, permitting and/or licensing, while complying with Florida law. We can also represent doctors, pharmacies and pharmacists facing proceedings brought by state regulators or agencies.

To contact the Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Ingraham, Christopher. “Why the DEA just said ‘no’ to loosening marijuana restrictions.” The Washington Post. (August 16, 2016). Web.

Saint Thomas, Catherine. “DEA keeps marijuana on the dangerous list of drugs.” The New York Times. (August 16, 2016). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area. www.TheHealthLawfirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone; (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Florida medical marijuana use, legal counsel for medical marijuana, marijuana defense attorney, marijuana for scientific research, Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) administrative actions, Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) defense attorney, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) legal counsel, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defense attorney, medical marijuana attorneys, marijuana growers attorney, Charlotte’s Webb, The Health Law Firm Reviews, legal representation for medical marijuana growers, health lawyer, The Health Law Firm Attorney Reviews, Healthcare Providers Service Organization (HPSO attorney, Nurses Service Organization (NSO) defense attorney, The Health Law Firm

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Mentally Ill Inmate Gouges Out Own Eyes, Sues County for Negligence

By Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D.

On December 7, 2017, a mentally ill inmate in the Boulder, Colorado, jail sued a sheriff in federal court, claiming that the jail staff failed to stop the man from using his fingers to gouge out his own eyes after several prior attempts to do so. The inmate sued him and 21 other jail employees in U.S. District Court in Denver. He claimed that he blinded himself because they failed to heed warning signs to treat his mental illness, according to the civil lawsuit filed by his Denver civil rights attorneys.

Inmate Negligence.

The inmate, who is now blind and suffers from deep, severe schizophrenic psychosis, is seeking monetary awards for negligence, including compensatory damages for physical and psychological injuries including pain and emotional distress and humiliation. He suffers from auditory and visual hallucinations, delusions and paranoia, according to the lawsuit.

On December 17, 2016, the inmate curled up in a ball in his cell with fingernails that hadn’t been cut for six weeks and plucked both of his eyes “completely out of his head,” the lawsuit says. The lawsuit also says jailers failed to respond to a series of precursor events in which the inmate said he would gouge his eyes out. In early 2016, he banged his head into his toilet, breaking seven teeth, the lawsuit says. Additionally, there were several prior attempts by the inmate to committed suicide.

Shane McGurk, the jail’s mental health program director, sought an emergency court order to get him psychiatric treatment. The judge ordered deputies to immediately take him to get psychiatric treatment. However, according to the lawsuit, the orders were ignored and the “Defendants’ willful and deliberate indifference to the inmate’s serious medical needs directly led to his self-mutilation, head and vertebrae injury, broken teeth and ultimately, to his permanent blindness.”

The jail failed to properly train officers in how to care for a mentally ill inmate, the lawsuit said.

This is not the first time an inmate or their families have sued for improper care during incarceration. Click here to read one of my prior blogs on a similar case.

It is an unfortunate reality that our society today tends to ignore citizens with true and severe mental health illnesses, choosing to treat them as criminals, instead. Instead of allocating funds for treatment, acting in a preventative manner, it prefers to spend the money for prisons and paying for incarceration. This is a complete shame. This poor, mentally ill individual suffers the consequences. Unfortunately, the officials who run our jails and prisons also suffer by being the treater of last resort, which is grossly unfair to them, as well. Our jail and prison officials should have a “safety relief valve” available to them where they can divert individuals who have been incarcerated because of their mental illnesses and obtain appropriate treatment for them.

Providing Representation For All Health Care Professionals.

Our firm has represented a number of nurses, physicians and other health care professionals who provide care in jails and prisons, as well as in other government facilities and institutions. We routinely represent physicians, nurses and advance practice nurses who work for the VA, the Department of Health, the county, the military, the Indian Health Service and other government agencies. Although government employees may have personal immunity from civil suits, they are not protected against termination and other employment actions, complaints against their professional license, National Practitioner Data Bank reports, and other types of administrative actions; our firm represents them in all of these. The government is not going to represent you in these. Call us at the first sign of a legal problem.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Mitchell, Kirk. “Mentally Ill inmate sues for negligence.” The Denver Post. (December 8, 2017). Web.

Mitchell, Kirk. “Psychotic Boulder jail inmate gouges out own eyes, sues county for negligence.” The Denver Post. (December 7, 2017). Web.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is an attorney and registered nurse. She practices with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area.

KeyWords: Legal representation for government physicians, legal representation for government nurses, legal representation for mental health professionals, mental health defense attorney, legal representation of mental health counselors, mental health counselor defense attorney, legal defense of professional licensure cases, legal representation for Board of Nursing cases, legal representation for Board of Medicine cases, Board of Nursing investigation defense attorney, legal representation for peer review, legal representation for administrative actions, legal representation for health care professionals, legal representation for psychiatrists, psychiatrists defense attorney, defense counsel for mental health professionals, health care lawyer, The Health Law Firm reviews

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.Copyright © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Florida Harvests It’s First Legal Medical Marijuana Crop

George IndestBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law
On July 18, 2016, Florida harvested it’s first legal marijuana crop. The new crop is being stored in multiple vacuum-packed, 441-gram bags in a freezer on the outskirts of Tallahassee. The harvest is the result of months of careful growing, monitoring, coaxing, and finally cultivating, scores of plants in a hidden farm overseen by horticulturalists and protected by armed guards. It is unknown which security company, if any, is providing security or if it approaches the security of Fort Knox.

This is one of two production facilities operated by Surterra Therapeutics, the first of six companies to win state approval to grow and harvest medical marijuana for the seriously ill and dying.

Charlotte’s Web.

In 2014, Florida adopted laws to allow two types of medical marijuana: non-euphoric strains, such as “Charlotte’s Web,” that is thought to help control seizures and ease symptoms of certain other medical conditions; and full-strength marijuana to alleviate pain, nausea and other symptoms for patients considered terminally ill. Since Surterra won approval to harvest last month, Florida has allowed four other companies to do the same: Chestnut Hill Tree Farm in Alachua County, Hackney Nursery in Gadsden County, Modern Health Concepts in Miami-Dade County, and Knox Nursery in Orange County.

These grow farms are poised to expand considerably if the required 60 percent of voters in November cast “Yes” ballots for Amendment 2 to the Florida Constitution, which would legalize full-strength marijuana for an estimated 450,000 Floridians with debilitating illnesses.

To read one of my prior blogs on medical marijuana in Florida, click here.

Vote Yes for Amendment 2.

It is my opinion that the legalization of marijuana, especially for the treatment of sick children, is many decades overdue. Parents should not have to face the Hobson’s choice of breaking the law or obtaining relief for their sick child. For a herbal medication which has proven to have infinitely less adverse consequences than either alcohol or tobacco, this should be a “no brainer.”

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys for Medical Marijuana Concerns.

The Health Law Firm attorneys can assist health care providers and facilities, such as doctors, pharmacists and pharmacies, wanting to participate in the medical marijuana industry. We can properly draft and complete the applications for registration, permitting and/or licensing, while complying with Florida law. We can also represent doctors, pharmacies and pharmacists facing proceedings brought by state regulators or agencies.

To contact the Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Source:

“Florida’s first medical marijuana crop cut up, stored.” Associated Press. (July 18, 2016). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida area. www.TheHealthLawfirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone; (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Florida medical marijuana use, legal counsel for medical marijuana, marijuana defense attorney, associations between cannabis use and physical health problems, Charlotte’s Webb, medical marijuana use for terminally ill patients, legal representation for medical marijuana, health lawyer, The Health Law Firm

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Study Finds States That Allow Medical Marijuana May Have Less Opioid Use

Headshot of The Health Law Firm's attorney George F. Indest IIIBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On September 15, 2016, a new study was released from Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, that suggests people in states that allow medical marijuana may be using fewer opioid painkillers. Researchers analyzed crash data in 18 states from 1999 to 2013 and revealed that states that allow medical marijuana use saw a reduction in opioid involvement in fatal car accidents.

The Relationship Between Medical Marijuana Laws and Opioid Use.

The study, published in the American Journal of Public Health, is the first look at how the relationship of medical marijuana laws might affect the use of opioid painkillers. “After the implementation of a medical marijuana law, there appears to be less opioid use, at least among young and middle-aged adults,” study lead author June Kim said. He’s a graduate student in epidemiology at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health in New York City.

The researchers used data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System database of about 69,000 drivers from 18 states who died in auto accidents between the years 1999 and 2013. Tests for alcohol and other drugs had been conducted on the drivers.

In states where medical marijuana law was legal and easily accessible, the study found that drivers between the ages of 21 and 40, had almost half the chances of testing positive for opioid painkillers, than those who crashed before such a law was implemented. The results further add to evidence suggesting that patients with chronic pain may substitute marijuana for a prescription painkiller in states where the option is available.

The study authors stressed that it’s not clear if the opioid painkillers — or, for that matter, marijuana — contributed to any of the car accidents.

Click here to read the published article in the American Journal of Public Health.

To read one of my prior blogs on the use of medical marijuana as a treatment for opioid addiction, click here.

Contact Experienced Health Law Attorneys for Medical Marijuana Concerns.

The Health Law Firm attorneys can assist health care providers and facilities, such as doctors, pharmacists and pharmacies, wanting to participate in the medical marijuana industry. We can properly draft and complete the applications for registration, permitting and/or licensing, while complying with Florida law. We can also represent doctors, pharmacies and pharmacists facing proceedings brought by state regulators or agencies.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Ingraham, Christopher. “Study: medical pot means less opioid use.” Orlando Sentinel. (September 16, 2016). Print.

Dotinga, Randy. “Do medical pot states have less opioid abuse?” WebMD News from HealthDay. (September 15, 2016). Web.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

KeyWords: Marijuana treatment for opioid addiction, alternative addiction treatment, alternative for painkillers, medical marijuana defense attorney, American Journal of Public Health, medical marijuana for patients with chronic pain, substituting medical marijuana for prescription opioid painkillers, lawyer for medical marijuana growers and distributors, health lawyers for marijuana distributors, legal counsel for marijuana growers and distributors, medical marijuana laws, medical marijuana legalization, medical marijuana lawyer, defense attorney, reviews of The Health Law Firm, The Health Law Firm attorney reviews, The Health Law Firm, attorneys for physicians, pharmacist legal defense attorney, Board of Medicine defense lawyer, Department of Health defense counsel

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of and a registered service mark of The Health Law Firm, P.A., a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 2017 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Questions and Answers about Complaints and Disciplinary Actions for Nurses, Physicians, Pharmacists and Other Health Care Professionals Being Investigated by the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA), Division of Professions and Occupations

By Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D., The Health Law Firm

When a physician, pharmacist, nurse or other licensed health professional in Colorado has a complaint filed for professional negligence or other professional wrongdoing, it is investigated by the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies or “DORA.” This will usually come in the form of a letter to the subject of the investigation. We recommend that you immediately contact an attorney experienced in such health professional licensure matters, and not try to respond or handle it by yourself. In many cases, your professional liability insurance will pay for your legal representation, even for a licensure action.

Following are some frequently asked questions and answers about DORA investigations.

Q: What is a “basis” for disciplinary action?

A: Each profession has a practice act, also known as an organic act or statute. These practice acts contain laws that govern a particular profession. The legal grounds for disciplinary action against a particular type of professional are set forth in the applicable practice act.

Q: How does the disciplinary process begin?

A: The disciplinary process begins when a complaint is filed with the regulatory authority by any member of the public, or when a regulatory authority initiates a complaint on its own.

Q: What is a complaint?

A: In the context of a professional disciplinary action, a complaint is an allegation that a licensee, certificate holder or registrant has violated the laws set forth in the applicable practice act. It is filed with or initiated by the appropriate regulatory authority, and it marks the beginning of the disciplinary process against a licensee, certificate holder or registrant.

Q: What happens after the complaint is filed?

A: The regulatory authority or its staff will review the facts alleged in the complaint to determine whether, if proven to be true, these facts constitute reasonable cause to believe a violation of the practice act has occurred. If the initial review determines that the regulatory authority does not have jurisdiction or that the regulatory authority does not have reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, the complaint will be dismissed, possibly with a confidential letter of concern to the licensee, certificate holder or registrant from the regulatory authority.
If the regulatory authority determines that it has reasonable cause to believe a violation of the practice act has occurred, a letter of admonition may be issued, the matter may be referred for disciplinary action, the action may be tabled to gather information, or a request may be submitted for a formal investigation with the Office of Investigations.

Q: What is the Office of Investigations?

A: Some complaints are investigated internally by the staff for a particular regulatory authority. However, the regulatory authority may also refer the complaint to the Office of Investigations, a program within the Division of Registrations, Department of Regulatory Agencies.

Q: If the complaint is forwarded to the Office of Investigations, do I receive notice?

A: You generally will receive a letter from the individual regulatory authority informing you that your complaint has been forwarded to the Office of Investigations. In some circumstances, however, the first contact you have regarding a complaint will be from the investigator assigned to handle the complaint.

Q: Do I need an attorney at this point?

A: A license, certificate or registration is an important property interest. It is important to remember that the regulatory authority, its staff, and the Office of Investigations cannot provide you with legal advice. You are not required to hire an attorney, but you have the right to be represented by an attorney at any stage of the proceeding. You are responsible for any costs associated with hiring an attorney. Your professional liability insurance carrier might provide assistance with legal costs associated with a professional disciplinary action.

Q: What happens in an investigation?

A: When a complaint is referred to the Office of Investigations, the assigned investigator acts as an impartial, fact-finding third party and does not “represent” the complainant, the regulatory authority, or the licensee, certificate holder or registrant. The Office of Investigations receives 500-600 cases a year. The average time to complete a case is 6 to 8 months depending on the complexity, witness cooperation and caseload of the investigator.
The investigator normally reviews the complaint and the response, subpoenas or otherwise obtains copies of pertinent documents or records, interviews witnesses and the licensee, certificate holder or registrant, and, where appropriate, retains an expert consultant to review the case. The investigator then prepares a written report that is reviewed by the regulatory authority, which will then determine whether to pursue disciplinary action. The investigator does not make any recommendations to the regulatory authority regarding what disciplinary action, if any, to take.

Q: How long does an investigation take?

A: The time frame to complete an investigation will vary. However, investigators try to process a complaint within 180 days of receipt of the complaint in the Office of Investigations. At times, the investigation of a case may take longer than 180 days. You may ask the investigator assigned to your case for an estimate of when the Report of Investigation will be prepared and presented to the regulatory authority.

Q: Do I get a copy of the Report of Investigation?

A: Generally, reports are not available to the public or to the licensee, certificate holder or registrant during the investigative stage of the proceeding or review process.

Q: Do I get notice of when the regulatory authority will review the Report of Investigation in my case?

A: This varies between programs. You may contact the regulatory authority or the investigator to inquire about the status of the investigation and the dates and locations of any meetings where the matter might be discussed. Some programs review Reports of Investigation in a closed meeting, which is not open to the public, including the licensee, certificate holder or registrant. Even if the disciplinary portion of the meeting is open to the public, generally you will not be permitted to address the regulatory authority and will only be allowed to listen to the discussion. Please check with the staff of your program.

Q: Can the public review government documents?

A: Regulatory authorities are governed by the Colorado Open Records Act, which provides the public access to certain government documents. Confidentiality requirements vary from program to program, and the investigator assigned to your case cannot advise you on this topic.

Q: What happens after the regulatory authority reviews the Report of Investigation?

A: If the regulatory authority finds that no violation occurred or that disciplinary action otherwise is not warranted, the case will be dismissed. If the regulatory authority finds that disciplinary action is not warranted, but that it has concerns about the conduct at issue, it may dismiss the case with a confidential letter of concern. If the regulatory authority finds that a violation occurred, it may impose discipline, including but not limited to a public letter of admonition, a probationary license, a suspension or a revocation. Disciplinary cases will be referred to the Office of Expedited Settlement (ESP) for settlement or the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) for formal prosecution of the matter.

Q: What happens when your case is referred to ESP?

A: If your case is referred to ESP, you will be contacted by a staff member from ESP who will provide you with the offer of settlement approved by the regulatory authority. Generally, if a settlement is not reached within 90 days, the matter will be referred to the Office of Attorney General (OAG).

Q: What happens if the case is referred to the OAG?

A: If your case is referred to the OAG, the assigned Assistant Attorney General will provide legal representation to the regulatory authority. The Assistant Attorney General may prepare formal charges based upon the alleged violations of the practice act. If formal charges are filed, a hearing will be conducted before an administrative law judge at the Office of Administrative Courts to determine whether the charges are proven. At the hearing, you would have the right to be represented by counsel, and would have the opportunity to present and confront oral and documentary evidence, and to testify in your own defense.

Q: What happens if, after the hearing, I am found to have committed a violation?

A: Following the hearing, the administrative law judge will issue an initial decision, which will include factual findings, conclusions of law and a recommended sanction. Either party may challenge the initial decision by filing exceptions with the regulatory authority. The regulatory authority will review the initial decision and issue a final agency order that may adopt, partially adopt or reverse the initial decision. If a violation of the practice act is established, the final agency order may impose sanctions, which can include a letter of admonition, a fine, continuing education, probation, suspension or revocation of your license, certificate or registration. You have the right to appeal the final agency order to the appropriate court.

Q: Is it possible to get a copy of disciplinary actions filed against a licensed professional or entity?

A: Yes. You can access any public disciplinary action document through our Online Services. To look up an licensee, registrant or certificate holder and learn if there are any public disciplinary action documents available, please visit Online Services License Lookup website: https://www.colorado.gov/dora/licensing/Lookup/LicenseLookup.aspx

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in the Representation of Health Professionals and Providers.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, CRNAs, pain management doctors, dentists, pharmacists, psychologists and other health providers in Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Medicare investigations, Medicaid investigations and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.


About the Author:
Carole C. Schriefer is a nurse-attorney with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456.

Sources: The above information is mostly from the Colorado DORA website as of 8/17/2015.

Notice: This is the provision of general information only and does not constitute the provision of legal advice. Every case is different and every set of facts and circumstances is different. Consult a lawyer about your individual case.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2015 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

By |2020-02-12T14:19:25-05:00May 15th, 2018|Categories: Colorado Health Law Blog|0 Comments

Colorado Unveils New Weapon in Fight Against Prescription Drug Abuse

By Carole C. Schriefer, R.N., J.D., The Health Law Firm

In the United States, Colorado ranks among the highest in prescription drug abuse. Prescribing practices have contributed to both the overuse as well as the illegal use of controlled substances. Recently, the Colorado Medical Board in collaboration with the Colorado Dental Board, Colorado Board of Nursing, Colorado Board of Pharmacy, and the Nurse-Physician Advisory Task Force for Colorado Healthcare, passed a policy for prescribing and dispensing opioids. This is the first time that all four Colorado licensing agencies have worked together to formulate a common policy for health care providers.

The new guidance sets the tone for how complaints involving prescribing and dispensing controlled substances will be viewed by these regulatory boards.

To read the new policy in its entirety, click here.

An Overview of the Prescribing and Dispensing Policy.

The new policy aims to reduce prescription drug abuse by better managing opioid prescribing and dispensing. The policy states that providers working with patients who are prescribed opioids should:

– Follow the policy for prescribing and dispensing opioids;
– Be informed about evidence-based practices for opioid use in health care and risk mitigation;
– Collaborate with the integrated health care team to decrease overprescribing, misuse and abuse of opioids;
– Use the Colorado Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) when initially prescribing medication and with each refill;
– Use caution when dispensing to new or unknown patients, filling weekend or late day prescriptions, and when filling prescriptions issued by a provider far from the location of the pharmacy; and
– Educate patients on appropriate use, storage and disposal of opioids, risks and the potential for diversion.

Red Flags.

The new policy describes certain “red flags” health care providers should look for when prescribing and dispensing opioids. It alludes to certain prescription amounts and types that will likely be considered substandard in the absence of a compelling reason for the prescription. For example, the policy advises opioid doses greater than the equivalent of 120 mg morphine are dangerous. The policy also advises against opioid treatment that exceeds 90 days. It’s suggested that prescribers should consider discontinuing opioid therapy when:

– The underlying painful condition is resolved;
– Intolerable side effects emerge;
– The patient’s quality of life fails to improve;
– Functioning deteriorates; or
– There is aberrant medical use.

Tread Lightly When Prescribing Opioids.

Whether you are a physician, nurse, dentist, pharmacist or other health care provider practicing pain management, you should read the entire policy and strictly follow its guidance. Keep detailed records of your pain patients’ care, including copies of PDMP data. As a professional dealing with pain patients, you should also feel comfortable referring appropriate patients to addiction and pain management specialists at any sign of abuse. Failure to follow the new policy may lead to disciplinary action against your license.

For more tips to protect yourself from being accused of overprescribing, click here for a previous blog.

Comments?

What do you think of Colorado’s policy for prescribing and dispensing opioids? Do you think this new policy will make an impact on the prescription drug abuse throughout the state? As a health care provider, will you follow the new policy? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact A Lawyer Experienced in the Representation of Health Care Professionals in Pain Management Defense.

The Health Law Firm attorneys represent physicians, pharmacists, nurses, clinics, dentists, pharmacies, health facilities and other health care providers in different cases involving allegations of overprescribing narcotics and pain medications. These include criminal investigations by local police and law enforcement authorities, investigations by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), complaints against professional licenses, and other types of cases. Having attorneys familiar with the medical standards of care and guidelines for prescribing narcotics and having access to expert medical and pharmacy professionals who can testify as expert witnesses in such cases is also crucial. We have represented professionals in administrative investigations and administrative hearings at both the state and federal level.

Call (970) 416-7456 now or visit our website www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

About the Author: Carole C. Schriefer is a nurse-attorney with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its regional office is in the Northern Colorado, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 155 East Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. Phone: (970) 416-7456.

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1999-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Load More Posts