Pittsburgh lawyers form medical marijuana firm |

Pittsburgh lawyers form medical marijuana firm

Ben Schmitt
Jasmine Goldband | Trib Total Media
Pittsburgh attorney Patrick Nightingale helped to form Cannabis Legal Solutions.

A trio of local attorneys announced Friday a specialty legal practice to serve clients in Pennsylvania’s emerging medical marijuana industry.

Pittsburgh attorney Patrick Nightingale, executive director of the Pennsylvania Medical Cannabis Society, formed Cannabis Legal Solutions along with Andrew M. Gross and Alan R. Patterson.

“We are excited for this new venture and opportunity to provide both business law services as well as criminal defense representation to this booming, niche industry,” Nightingale said in a statement. “Our well-established relationships in the local medicinal cannabis market — both with businesses and legislators — combined with the wide array of legal expertise in our team makes us uniquely qualified and excited to serve this sector.”

Pennsylvania’s medical marijuana program is expected to be up and running by mid-2018.

Under state law, patients — after consulting with doctors — can apply for a state-issued medical marijuana card if a doctor certifies that they have one of 17 qualified medical conditions, including epilepsy, cancer, multiple sclerosis and seizure disorders.

Nightingale, a criminal defense attorney, is a longtime advocate for the legalization of medical marijuana.

The firm expects clients to range from medical marijuana growers and processors, to dispensaries, distributors and medical professionals, as well as individuals facing criminal marijuana charges. Specialty areas include general business law, bankruptcy law, real estate law, licensing issues and criminal litigation.

Ben Schmitt is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-320-7991, [email protected] or via Twitter @Bencschmitt.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.