As we reported in September, Michigan cultivator Hello Farms Licensing MI won a $31.8 million jury verdict against Curaleaf subsidiaries GR Vending MI and CURA MI, only to see the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reverse that award weeks later. Now a national cannabis advocacy group has entered the fight to get that decision reconsidered.

NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, has reportedly submitted a brief supporting Hello Farms’ push for a second look at the case. The filing adds a well-known voice to a dispute that could shape how state-licensed cannabis businesses handle contract disputes with bigger, better-funded partners.

What Was the Original Dispute About?

The case traces back to a cannabis supply contract between Hello Farms and the Curaleaf subsidiaries. As we detailed in our earlier coverage, GR Vending agreed to purchase Hello Farms’ 2020 and 2021 harvests, accepted an initial shipment, then stopped taking deliveries once wholesale prices dropped in early 2021.

A federal jury sided with Hello Farms in February 2025, awarding $31.8 million in damages. With interest, that liability reportedly climbed past $38 million later in the year.

The Sixth Circuit reversed that award on September 10, 2026. Writing for the panel, Judge John Nalbandian concluded that federal courts cannot enforce agreements involving conduct prohibited under the Controlled Substances Act, regardless of how the businesses involved were operating under Michigan law. The panel found that a damages award tied to an illegal bargain was just as unenforceable as an order compelling illegal performance.

Hello Farms filed a petition on October 8 asking the court for both panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, hoping to get that ruling undone.

Why Is NORML Getting Involved in a Cannabis Contract Case?

According to the brief, NORML supports Hello Farms’ position that federal prohibition should not automatically prevent state-licensed cannabis companies from recovering damages when a commercial partner breaks a contract. The organization has a long history of advocating for cannabis consumers and businesses operating under state law, and this case touches on an issue that reaches well beyond Hello Farms and Curaleaf.

NORML’s involvement signals that this dispute has grown into something bigger than a disagreement over one supply contract. It’s now a test case for how courts handle marijuana business disputes when federal law and state licensing collide.

No additional detail about the specific legal arguments in NORML’s filing has surfaced publicly, so we’re sticking closely to what has been reported rather than guessing at the finer points of the brief.

Why This Case Matters for State-Licensed Cannabis Businesses

This dispute has become one of the clearest examples of the legal uncertainty facing state-licensed cannabis companies. Independent cultivators like Hello Farms often depend heavily on contracts with larger purchasers to move their product and keep operations funded. When a cultivator plants a crop, expands acreage, or invests in testing infrastructure, it’s usually counting on a buyer to follow through on its end of the bargain.

If a buyer can invoke federal illegality to avoid paying for a breached agreement, the financial risk falls disproportionately on the smaller operator. The bigger company walks away relatively unscathed, while the grower absorbs the loss of unsold product and reduced pricing from backup buyers.

That imbalance is exactly what legal experts flagged after the September ruling. Vicente LLP partners Charles Alovisetti and Jeremy Shaw told mg Magazine that the decision “slams the door on the common loophole that awarding money damages is lawful” in cannabis disputes. That closes off a strategy many smaller operators assumed would protect them even if specific performance wasn’t an option.

What Happens Next in the Hello Farms Case?

The case remains pending in the Sixth Circuit as of this writing. Hello Farms’ petition, filed by counsel including former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal, asks the court to examine whether the panel’s approach conflicts with Supreme Court precedent, the Sixth Circuit’s own prior rulings, and the approach taken by other circuits, according to Libation Law Blog.

The petition argues the Controlled Substances Act doesn’t expressly void private supply contracts the way other federal statutes have voided specific agreement types. It also points to Congress’s appropriations restrictions protecting state medical marijuana programs and the April 2026 rule moving state-licensed medical marijuana to Schedule III as evidence that federal policy on cannabis isn’t as one-sided as the panel suggested.

Whether the Sixth Circuit agrees to rehear the case is still an open question. Even if rehearing is granted, the panel never addressed Curaleaf’s separate challenge to the damages evidence, meaning Hello Farms could still face a long road before collecting anything.

For now, cultivators and processors operating under contracts with larger purchasers should pay close attention. Legal experts have already started advising state-court venue clauses or arbitration provisions in cannabis contracts as a way to sidestep this exact problem. Until the Sixth Circuit rules on rehearing, or Congress addresses marijuana’s status under federal law directly, the accountability gap this case has exposed isn’t going away.

Frequently Asked Questions

---