Medical Marijuana Inc (MJNA)

[Det_Robert_Thorne]

Kannaway/HDDC/GH's attorney files to withdraw in CannaVest lawsuit

On April 28, 2015, Gaston & Gaston, the law firm representing Kannaway, General Hemp and HDDC Holdings (K, G & H) in the lawsuit filed by CannaVest over the Beauty Defined trademark, filed a motion petitioning the court to allow it to withdraw from the case.

The reasons given in the filing seem to indicate that K, G & H:

1) Can't or won't follow the litigation plan proposed by Gaston,
2) Isn't being forthcoming with information that Gaston requires
3) There is a disagreement on the direction of the litigation
4) K, G & H are corresponding with CannaVest and its attorney without notice to G & G

My guess is that, especially after the exhibits in the original complaint made public the reality of KannaWay's sales in 20114, the K, G & H side wants to go to arbitration, in order to prevent the release of more potentially embarrassing information.

Here are the reasons as listed in the filing, followed by a link to the document itself:

1. Withdrawal by Gaston & Gaston, APLC will neither prejudice Defendants/Counterclaimants nor delay trial.

2. Gaston & Gaston, APLC has attempted to put a litigation plan in place on a number of occasions to facilitate the information and resolution necessary to competently represent the Defendants/Counterclaimants. No such plan has been followed or implemented by Defendants/Counterclaimants to date.

3. The Principals of Defendants/Counterclaimants have been notified by Gaston & Gaston, APLC on various occasions since February 2015 of the need for them to seek alternative or additional counsel to assist with this litigation. A number of meetings were held in person at Gaston & Gaston, APLC’s office and by conference call with attorneys introduced to Defendants/Counterclaimants by Gaston & Gaston, APLC, who expressed willingness to act as counsel or co-counsel for Defendants/Counterclaimants in this action. Defendants/ Counterclaimants likewise expressed desire to retain such attorneys, yet failed to act on various occasions to hire additional counsel.

4. Counsel has had tremendous difficulty obtaining the information necessary from the Principals of HDDC Holdings, General Hemp and Kannaway to defend the allegations at hand, and prosecute the various claims of the Parties.

5. Moreover, a disagreement in the direction of litigation has arisen, making continued representation of Defendants/Counterclaimants by Gaston & Gaston, APLC unfeasible.

6. Additionally, Counsel has just been made aware that Defendants/Counterclaimants and their agents have initiated discussions and sent correspondence to Plaintiff and Counsel for Plaintiff without notice to Gaston & Gaston, APLC and without allowing Gaston & Gaston, APLC to participate in such discussions. Gaston & Gaston, APLC did not advise Defendants/Counterclaimants on such communications. Such communications without the knowledge of counsel undermine the attorney-client relationship.

https://archive.org/details/CANVVs.KannaWayGastonWithdrawal