Other

Weed Company Sued for Misleading Labels

Cannabis businesses need to deliver the promised high or they will be dealing with angry potheads in the courtroom. A big push for legalizing cannabis stems from the fact that weed dealers make it more accountable for what they sell to potheads. When the dealers aren’t keeping up with the promises, potheads don’t hesitate to make a legal push to get them to step up.

Jasper Centeno and Blake Wilson, two Californian weed customers, have filed a lawsuit against a local cannabis company. They argue that weed distributor DreamFields is misleading its customers and the drugs fall short on the high. They claim that the company is misrepresenting the psychoactive compound content of its Jeeter brand of cannabis products.

Based on the product description for the pre-rolled joints, it promises a greater buzz than the actual thing. DreamField’s Baby Jeeter Fire OG Diamond Infused pre-rolled joints claim on the label that they have a 46 percent THC content. However, Weed Week’s tests showed that the real content is only around 25 percent.

“Consumers are willing to pay more for cannabis products with higher THC content,” the lawsuit states “In 2020, cannabis that was 7-14 percent THC content retailed for $5.31 a gram, whereas cannabis with over 28 percent THC retailed for more than twice that — $12.89.”

“Consumers ‘use THC percentages like nutritional labels, purchasing products based on their THC content.’ Defendants know that THC content is highly material to consumers and have a direct financial incentive to overstate the THC content of their products,” the complaint reads.

The test results show a 10 percent error margin and it confirms that the company has exaggerated the numbers on the label. It’s not just a single product; upon investigation, other products, like Baby Jeeter Churros Diamond Infused, showed errors in the reported THC content.

The false advertising strategies may end up costing the company high dollars.

Source: https://www.dovel.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Jeeter-complaint-FINAL.pdf