Lawyers With Cannabis Clients Face Ethical Challenges, Panel Says
The panelists were discussing ethical issues that may arise for cannabis counsel while, at the same time, Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced during his State of the State address his proposal to legalize recreational marijuana for adult use.
January 15, 2019 at 05:41 PM
4 minute read
As marijuana continues to be subject to a patchwork of laws in the United States, lawyers with clients in the cannabis industry must walk a fine line when weighing ethical considerations, attorneys from the New York State Bar Association's cannabis law committee explained on Tuesday at a panel discussion.
The panelists were discussing ethical issues that may arise for cannabis counsel while, at the same time, Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced during his State of the State address his proposal to legalize recreational marijuana for adult use.
Sara Payne of Barclay Damon in Syracuse, who serves on the committee, said the committee is not aware of any cases in which an attorney was hit for ethics violations simply because they have clients in the cannabis industry, but said that representing clients in the industry could become an ethical issue for attorneys who take part in unrelated illicit activity.
“If you're trafficking cocaine on the side and you're driving drunk while representing cannabis clients, you can bet when the DA is charging you he's going to throw that in to your ethics folks,” Payne said.
Medical marijuana is legal in 32 states, Washington, D.C., Guam and Puerto Rico. It is also legal for recreational use by adults in 10 states and D.C. The legal pot industry raked in $10 billion in 2017, according to Payne's presentation.
But even in states with legal pot, attorneys should still advise cannabis clients that it is still outlawed at the federal level, Payne said.
Attorney ethics watchdogs in states across the U.S. have adopted three general positions as to how lawyers should approach potential clients in the cannabis industry: don't do it at all, advise clients in a limited capacity or, like New York, “advise and assist.”
In states where attorneys have been advised to take the third approach, lawyers may assist cannabis clients in following the law but are not allowed to break the laws themselves.
But Payne said that where attorneys could cross the line is offering up business advice such as working on negotiations or business strategy, an undertaking that she said would be considered drug trafficking.
Attorneys should include disclosures in their engagement letters with cannabis clients to remind them of the federal prohibition and inform them that they might not have full attorney-client privilege, they are subject to getting raided by law enforcement and their attorneys may have to testify against them.
Advice about the current state of the law should be conveyed not only to “plant-touching” clients such as cannabis manufacturers and distributors, but also to ancillary parties such as bankers and landlords. Investors in the cannabis industry, for instance, should be warned that they could lose their money.
In 2014, after New York passed its medical marijuana law, the State Bar issued an ethics opinion that is tied to the medical marijuana regime, stating that attorneys can advise clients on medical marijuana laws and emphasizing that it's still illegal on the federal level.
The State Bar's cannabis law committee is developing a new ethics opinion that would be based on legalized marijuana in New York.
“It's going to create a lot more problems than it will solve if we don't have an updated ethics opinion,” said Robert Volynsky of Sichenzia Ross Ference, who also took part in the panel.
Read more:
'Protector of the Little Guy' Expanding Focus From Land Use to Cannabis
Legalizing Recreational Marijuana in New York Would Usher in New Era
As NY Health Dept. Backs Marijuana Legalization, Attorneys Eye New Practice Area
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'You Became a Corrupt Politician': Judge Gives Prison Time to Former Sen. Robert Menendez for Corruption Conviction
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Public Notices/Calendars
- 2Wednesday Newspaper
- 3Decision of the Day: Qui Tam Relators Do Not Plausibly Claim Firm Avoided Tax Obligations Through Visa Applications, Circuit Finds
- 4Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-116
- 5Big Law Firms Sheppard Mullin, Morgan Lewis and Baker Botts Add Partners in Houston
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250