Top

blog

Stories

 

Marijuana: David Lane takes over Cannabis University suit against Broncos, Pat Bowlen

cannabis.university.winnebago-thumb-565x300.jpg
Freddy Moore, left, and other members of the 1 Blunt Radio crew at the Mile High Stadium on January 12.
Earlier this year, we told you about a lawsuit against the Denver Broncos and its owner, Pat Bowlen, after police twice ejected a Cannabis University vehicle from a Mile High Stadium parking lot, allegedly because the word "cannabis" was printed on it.

The complaint has already been amended once. But now, powerful attorney David Lane has taken on the case, and he predicts that the Broncos are headed for a loss.

See also: Pot advocate sues Mile High Stadium, Pat Bowlen over ban of Cannabis University vehicle

As we've reported, the matters in question took place on the mornings of January 12 and January 19, prior to the Broncos' victories over San Diego and New England, respectively, in a pair of NFL playoff games.

After the first of these incidents, Cannabis University's Michelle LaMay told Westword that ticket-holder Freddy Moore of marijuana-centric 1 Blunt Radio, an Internet program, was among those who'd ridden to the game in a Winnebago emblazoned with both the program's logo and the Cannabis University name. The plan was to broadcast during the run-up to the game -- but something went wrong.

LaMay wasn't present on the 12th, but she was listening in until the feed went down. In response to a text from her asking if there was a problem, Moore sent a reply that included "a photo of a Denver policeman on a motorcycle," she recalls. "And there was obviously somebody else there -- a representative who said their presence was 'insulting.'"

Why? The apparent reason was the presence of the word "cannabis" on the side of the vehicle.

michelle.lamay.cannabis.university.winnebago-thumb-565x753.jpg
Michelle LaMay posing alongside the Cannabis University vehicle, in an image from her Facebook page.
In the initial complaint, LaMay, representing herself and Cannabis University, argued that the other CU "was defamed and damaged in a public place by the Defendants: The Defendants' restraint of the plaintiff's speech violated the First Amendment rights of a corporation; and the Defendants' complaint and enforcement was subjective and inequitable."

An amended complaint filed in March added another claim, arguing that the defendants' actions violated Colorado statutes against disparaging homegrown food materials. Here's the statute in question:

It is unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, association, or corporation or any servant, agent, employee, or officer thereof to destroy or cause to be destroyed, or to permit to decay or to become unfit for use or consumption, or to take, send, or cause to be transported out of this state so to be destroyed or permitted to decay, or knowingly to make any materially false statement, for the purpose of maintaining prices or establishing higher prices for the same, or for the purpose of limiting or diminishing the quantity thereof available for market, or for the purpose of procuring, or aiding in procuring, or establishing, or maintaining a monopoly in such articles or products, or for the purpose of in any manner restraining trade, any fruits, vegetables, grain, meats, or other articles or products ordinarily grown, raised, produced, or used in any manner or to any extent as food for human beings or for domestic animal.
The subject of whether these tactics would have worked is now moot. Attorney Lane, featured earlier today in a post about a controversy over a restorative-justice letter in the James Holmes case, has taken on LaMay's cause and has simplified the arguments to focus on an alleged infringement of free-speech rights.

Continue for more about David Lane taking over the Cannabis University lawsuit against the Denver Broncos and owner Pat Bowlen, including an original document.



Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
37 comments
Ricky Morse
Ricky Morse

Stoners don't even understand the game why be there at all

Curt Stewart
Curt Stewart

Everyone knows that the NFL is completely in bed with the alcohol industry so I guess they didn't want the competition in their parking lot.

Aaron Betcher
Aaron Betcher

hell yes, they still have to pay back the city for the fucking stadium

Lane Trujillo
Lane Trujillo

It is a PRIVATE lot next to a stadium that used PUBLIC funds to build it. The Stadium is PRIVATELY owned. They have zero case. Get off my lawn.

Ben Skigen
Ben Skigen

Regardless of who is right or wrong, look at all the free press they are getting out of this!

Darlene Martinez
Darlene Martinez

They need to kick some of the Broncos out of the Stadium...No lie

Doug Hubka
Doug Hubka

Guess what, even though the taxpayers paid for the stadium, it is under the exclusive control of the Broncos . It is not public property.

Che Weller
Che Weller

Its a word. Wtf is wrong with these meatheads... too many concussions

Matthew Munn
Matthew Munn

He makes the argument that "the taxpayers paid for the parking lot", but if that's the case- how are they allowed to charge money on game day for parking?

Matthew Munn
Matthew Munn

Is it private or public property? If public, they have a case, if private, they do not.

Kandi Janée
Kandi Janée

You cannot violate the rights of the people because you don't like something....this is a solid case that will settle out of court. The Denver Broncos nor the DPD don't want these problems. Know your rights people.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

 Go Michelle!  I was glad to read that David Lane would take on the case (and that veggie-libel has been dropped as an argument).  I never hear from you; call me.

GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

People who go around pushing controversial issues shouldn't be surprised when they face controversy.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

... COMMERCIAL Speech isn't free.



RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

@GuestWho What does your comment have to do with the article?  Michelle was doing nothing more provocative than parking; I hardly think that the fact that the vehicle she parked advertises the school she runs qualifies as "pushing controversial issues".  No one in the article is described as surprised, but if anyone is, I expect it is the defendants, and unpleasantly so.

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@RobertChase


bobbie, you were a bit disingenuous in your comment "Michelle was doing nothing more provocative than parking...".  The picture tells a much different story.


However, once past your blatant falsehoods, I agree that they have the right to be there.  

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@fishingblues @RobertChase


Weren't you the same bigoted fucktard who sided with the "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" racists and homophobic business owners?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@fishingblues @DonkeyHotay @RobertChase


So you DID support the lowlife bigots and racist business owners who cower behind the legally false assertion that they "reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" ... but now hypocritically assert that The Broncos can't refuse service to stoners who use their parking lot to ADVERTISE their stoner businesses, eh fucktard?


jamesmcvaney
jamesmcvaney

@DonkeyHotay Comments by you, like the one above, where you use foul language to denigrate others are the main reason I rarely read Westword online anymore. 

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay 


So, "look it up" was just too difficult for you?


I overstated when I said they have the "right" to be there.  I just agree that they should be allowed to be there.


Private property rights are paramount.  I guess the questions is, is the parking lot private or public?  

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@jamesmcvaney <== says the self-declared "expert political consultant" who laughably predicted that Prop AA would fail ... by a 2:1 margin.


ROTFLMAO!!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

@fishingblues "I overstated when I said they have the "right" to be there"


So you were WRONG once again.


Noted.

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay @fishingblues


Gosh stinky, this dumb fuck could have been talking about you or any of the loopy liberals out there.


1.  Individualist  -- dang that is close to the liberal narcissism except it includes personal responsibility,


2.  Small government -- aren't you the whiny little sniveler who is always bitching about government overreach?  


3.  Recognized need?  Recognized by whom?  Welfare, nanny state entitlements?  The government created the "need" to support its self-importance and justify its ever increasing size.


4.  Intolerable smugness?  Are you shitting me.  There is nothing so intolerably smug as a loopy, loony, pompous, self-absorbed liberal.


5.  Naive?  Don't you think every philosophy thinks an opposing philosophy is naive?  You fucking twit.  


Meanwhile:


http://listverse.com/2013/01/17/10-reasons-why-communism-sucks/

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay @fishingblues


You do come off as a bit of a cartoon character, stinky.  It is no wonder that is where you were educated.  


Tell me something, is  Superman really made of steel?  Fucking moron.  

fishingblues
fishingblues topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay 


Hey stinky, I hear Archie is going to die saving his gay friend.  Are you that cartoon friend?  

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...