Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Judgment Rendered in Favor of Grower in First Civil RICO Trial for Cannabis Industry

By Jun Y. Kwon & Stanley Jutkowitz on November 6, 2018
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

A Colorado federal jury sided with the owner of a state-licensed cannabis cultivation business last Wednesday in a federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) suit brought against him by his neighbors.

In 2015, Michael and Hope Reilly brought a federal RICO lawsuit in Colorado against Parker Walton and his cannabis cultivation operation that neighbored their property. The Reillys claimed that the smells and sounds from the cannabis facility caused damage to their property. The trial court dismissed their complaint on the grounds that they failed to prove any cognizable injury stemming from the RICO violation. The Reillys appealed to the Tenth Circuit.

The Tenth Circuit reversed the dismissal in 2017, reasoning that a cannabis cultivation operation, which is illegal under federal law, amounted to racketeering activity in violation of RICO section 1962 and that the Reillys had made legally sufficient allegations in their complaint. The suit went to trial last Monday and the jurors heard from various experts on whether the cannabis cultivation operation was releasing a smell and if so, how such smell impacts the value of a neighboring property. Ultimately, the jurors rendered a verdict in Walton’s favor, unconvinced that the cannabis cultivation operation had diminished the value of the Reillys’ land.

Industry players have been paying close attention to this case as the revival of the suit by the Tenth Circuit has spurred other RICO suits against cannabis operations. Because cannabis cultivation is still illegal at the federal level, the Reillys were able to transform their state law nuisance cause of action into a federal RICO action. However, this jury verdict highlights the difficulty for plaintiffs in a RICO action to not only allege but prove an injury to their business or property. This verdict, along with the high costs to litigate such racketeering lawsuits, will likely curb the eagerness to bring these lawsuits in the future.

Photo of Stanley Jutkowitz Stanley Jutkowitz

Stanley Jutkowitz is the editor for The Blunt Truth®, as well as a Corporate senior counsel in the Washington, DC office and chair of Seyfarth’s Cannabis Law practice group. Stan was named a 2020 “Trailblazer” for Cannabis Law by the National Law Journal.

Read more about Stanley JutkowitzEmail
  • Posted in:
    Cannabis
  • Blog:
    The Blunt Truth®
  • Organization:
    Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo