Blog Post
By Zachary Kimmel

In a matter of first impression, Pennsylvania’s Appellate Court issued a decision affirming a private right of action under Pennsylvania’s Medical Marijuana Act (“MMA”) and permitting a claim to proceed for wrongful discharge in violation of Pennsylvania public policy. The Appellate Court’s decision in Palmiter answered two questions creating binding precedent and opening the door to prospective plaintiffs asserting discrimination claims under the MMA. In rendering the decision, the Appellate Court made clear that the MMA, although not expressly, implicitly calls for a private right of action to effectuate its purpose. Further, it held that an employee can assert a wrongful discharge claim in violation of public policy based on the allegation that the employee was discriminated against due to their status as an individual who is certified to use medical cannabis.

Blog Post
By Kevin M. Levy and Jonathan A. Havens and Kermit J. Nash and Dena B. Calo

Starting June 5, Pennsylvania restaurants will be permitted to resume somewhat-normal dining service. Limitations have been set for counties across the state depending on their current phase of reopening. Click here to read more about what limitations have been put in place from county to county.

Blog Post
By Ruth A. Rauls

The Lackawanna Court of Common Pleas in Pennsylvania held, in a matter of first impression, that language in the state’s Medical Marijuana Act ("MMA") creates a private right of action for an employee that is terminated for off-site use of medical marijuana.  In Palmiter v.