This article was updated Feb. 6 with statements from Curaleaf and Ascend Wellness, as well as more details from the lawsuit.
Ohio’s top legal officer is accusing nine of the nation’s largest cannabis companies of trying to squeeze smaller players out of the state’s adult-use marketplace.
State Attorney General Dave Yost filed an antitrust lawsuit on Feb. 5 in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, arguing that nine multistate cannabis operators are participating in anti-competitive practices that “reduce product choice and keep prices artificially high.”
The lawsuit names Ascend Wellness, Ayr Wellness, The Cannabist Co., Cresco Labs, Curaleaf, Green Thumb Industries, Jushi, Trulieve and Verano as defendants.
“Our investigation uncovered allegations of an industry-wide scheme designed to push small Ohio businesses out of the market,” Yost said. “Ohio’s antitrust laws protect competition and consumers, not backroom deals that rig the system for a select few.”
The lawsuit expands on this, stating that the nine multistate operators "have combined and conspired to form cartels to limit the availability of independent Ohio cannabis companies’ products to Ohio consumers. ... These cannabis cartels’ goal is straightforward: eliminate independent Ohio rivals and keep Ohio cannabis prices artificially elevated compared to declining prices in other states."
Cannabis Business Times reached out to all nine companies seeking comment. A Green Thumb spokesperson said the company received the complaint and is reviewing it, but it doesn't comment on pending litigation. A Cresco Labs spokesperson said the same.
Curaleaf's public relations team provided CBT with the following statement from the company:
"Curaleaf is aware of a recent complaint filed by the Ohio Attorney General related to alleged violations of the Valentine Act against several licensed cannabis operators in Ohio. While we remain committed to a transparent and collaborative relationship with all state regulators, the current trajectory of this inquiry is both novel and premature.
"After months of cooperating with the Attorney General’s inquiry, we are dismayed that a complaint has been filed without any attempt to resolve these differences before taking such dramatic action. True regulatory oversight is best served through meaningful dialogue and a thorough understanding of the industry, rather than high-profile litigation designed for a news cycle.
"Curaleaf has invested significantly in Ohio’s economy, creating jobs and providing safe, tested products to medical patients and adult-use consumers. While we will continue to defend our business practices as legitimate, necessary, and pro-competitive, we remain open to a good-faith resolution that acknowledges the unique complexities of this industry."
Ascend Wellness' public relations team provided the following statement from the company:
"Ascend is aware of the complaint filed by the Ohio Attorney General’s office and is prepared to vigorously defend against the allegations. Our Ohio stores maintain longstanding relationships with local single-state operators, prominently featuring their products on our retail menus and accounting for roughly two-thirds of third-party inventory at our retail stores. We have confidence in a fair and favorable resolution."
According to the attorney general, the lawsuit stems from an October 2024 tip claiming that senior representatives from the defendants’ companies met in late 2022 and struck a deal to prioritize one another’s products while reducing shelf space for their smaller competitors.
“The tip further alleged that some companies established explicit internal quotas, reserving a substantial percentage of dispensary shelf space for products sourced through reciprocal agreements with other multistate operators,” according to Yost’s office.
According to the tip, from an Ohio cannabis industry employee, these reciprocal purchasing agreements were negotiated at a national level, but also targeted smaller Ohio businesses, including reducing or eliminating purchases from cultivators and processors not in the multistate operators’ inner circle.
Yost’s lawsuit alleges that the defendants violated Ohio’s Valentine Act by:
- Entering into reciprocal trade agreements with competitors;
- Sharing competitively sensitive information; and
- Engaging in discriminatory distribution practices that disadvantaged independent Ohio cannabis operators.
According to Yost’s office, this conduct “reduced product choice and quality for Ohio consumers, stifled innovation, and allowed the defendants to maintain or increase supra-competitive prices in the state’s cannabis market.”
The attorney general is seeking injunctive relief in the lawsuit, which points to the $700 million in adult-use sales recorded at licensed dispensaries in the first year of the state's expanded marketplace.
"The lure of success in Ohio’s growing cannabis market has attracted large, multistate cannabis operators to eagerly clamber for Ohio consumer dollars," the lawsuit states. "But these multistate operators aren’t clambering to participate in the competition; they’re actively suppressing it."
