cdphe complaint

7/23/2019 CDPHE complaint

1/13

DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER,STATE OF COLORADO

City and County Building1437 Bannock StreetDenver, CO 80202720-865-8301_________________________________________________Plaintiffs:

CURTIS BEAN, LARISA BOLIVAR, STEPHEN OTERO,

MATTHEW KAHL, and ZACH PHILLIPS

v.

Defendants:

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND

THE ENVIRONMENT, and COLORADO BOARD OF

HEALTH

COURT USE ONLY

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

Robert T. Hoban, #33151C. Adam Foster, #35969Jean E. S. Gonnell, #44623Hoban & Feola, LLC

730 17thStreet, Suite 405Denver, Colorado 80202Telephone: 303-674-7000

Case Number:

COMPLAINT FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO C.R.S. 24-4-106 AND

DESIGNATION OF RECORD

Plaintiffs, Curtis Bean, Larisa Bolivar, Stephen Otero, Matthew Kahl and ZachPhillips, by and through their attorneys, Hoban & Feola, LLC, hereby commence an action

for judicial review of a final determination by the Colorado Department of Public Healthand Environment (CDPHE) and the ColoradoBoard of Health (the Board), respectfullystating and alleging as follows:

DATE FILED: August 19, 2015 4:00 PM

FILING ID: 209C71D13C06B

CASE NUMBER: 2015CV32969


2/13

2

I. SUMMARY1

1. Each of the individual Plaintiffs suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

and uses medical marijuana2to control the symptoms of PTSD. Plaintiffs respectfullyask this Court to reverse the July 15, 2015 decision of the Board denying a petition toadd PTSD as an acceptable condition for medical marijuana recommendations (thePetition).

2. The individual Plaintiffs access to appropriate medicinal strains of marijuana has beenseverely impeded by the Boards refusal to recognize PTSD as an appropriate condition

for medical marijuana recommendations. This is because many of the most effectivestrains of medical marijuana for treating PTSD are only available to registered medicalmarijuana patients, and the majority of the most knowledgeable medical marijuanacaregivers will only treat registered patients. Additionally, to the limited extent that the

most effective strains of medical marijuana for treating PTSD are available through therecreational marijuana market, such strains are significantly more expensive, whichimposes severe financial hardship on Plaintiffs and similarly situated individualssuffering from PTSD. All of these factors present significant obstacles to Plaintiffs andother individuals suffering from PTSD who wish to obtain a medical marijuanarecommendatios from a licensed healthcare provider to treat their PTSD symptoms.

3. The Defendantsarbitrary and capricious decision to deny the Petition based upon thepurported lack of medical evidence creates a vicious Catch-22 by impeding researchto further quantify the benefits and side-effects of using medical marijuana to treatPTSD and hampering efforts to identify and refine the most effective strains of medicalmarijuana for treating PTSD. Moreover, the Defendants have arbitrarily deniedphysicians the opportunity to use their clinical judgment to prescribe the medicine thatwill most effectively treat their patients PTSD symptoms.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has jurisdiction to hear this case under C.R.S. 24-4-106.

5. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to C.R.S. 24-4-106(4), which provides that, theresidence of a state agency for the purposes of [judicial review of agency rulemaking

1The section headings and footnotes in this Complaint are for the sake of convenience only,and require no answer beyond the answer to the allegations set forth in the numberedparagraphs.2Many people prefer the word cannabis to marijuana because it isthe scientificallycorrect name of the plant, they believe that marijuana has been unfairly stigmatized andthat cannabis better reflects the medical, industrial and scientific potential of the plant.This Complaint uses the phrase medical marijuana because it is used in the ColoradoConstitution, the Colorado Revised Statutes, and the rules of various state agencies.


3/13

3

action] shall be the City and County of Denver. See also C.R.C.P. 98(c) (venue is properin the county where the Defendant resides).

III. PARTIES

6. The Defendant CDPHE is an agency of the State of Colorado, and is responsible forreviewing petitions to add specific medical conditions to the list of conditions that maybe properly treated with medical marijuana.

7. The Defendant Board is a branch of the CDPHE and is responsible for conductinghearings regarding proposed CDPHE rules, including hearings to add specific medicalconditions to the list of conditions for which physicians may recommend medicalmarijuana.

8. Plaintiff Curtis Bean is an individual resident of Lakewood, Colorado. Mr. Bean servedas a U.S. Army sniper during two tours of duty in Iraq. Mr. Bean experienced manytraumatic events while serving in Iraq, including witnessing the aftermath of a roadsidebomb that destroyed a Humvee, killing four of his friends.

9. When Mr. Bean returned to the U.S. after active duty he suffered from undiagnosedPTSD, and attempted to self-medicate using alcohol. After receiving an appropriatePTSD diagnosis, Mr. Bean completed the Denver Veterans Administration (VA)Medical Centers seven-week inpatient PTSD program in January 2013. Mr. Bean is nowextremely active in the veterans community, giving art classes to veterans through the

VA and Denver Vet Center. Mr. Bean also established a non-profit organization calledArt of War to promote art therapy for veterans.

10.Mr. Bean uses marijuana to alleviate symptoms of PTSD and believes that otherveterans suffering from PTSD will also benefit from using medical marijuana. But asexplained above, the Board has harmed Mr. Bean by denying him the opportunity toobtain a medical prescription to treat his PTSD symptoms using marijuana.

11.Plaintiff Larisa Bolivar is an individual resident of Denver, Colorado. Ms. Bolivar wassexually molested at the age of five and suffered horrific physical, sexual and emotionalabuse both as a child and as a young adult. In the early 2000s Ms. Bolivar sought

professional help and was diagnosed with PTSD, generalized anxiety disorder andagoraphobia and bulimia.

12.Ms. Bolivars psychiatrist prescribed her a series of selective serotonin reuptakeinhibitors (SSRIs)a class of psychotropic pharmaceutical drugs frequentlyprescribed to treat PTSD symptoms--through 2008. None of the SSRIs was sufficientlyeffective in treating her symptoms, and each had significant side effects. Ms. Bolivar


4/13

4

also obtained a prescription for Xanax, an anti-anxiety medication that is sometimesprescribed to treat PTSD on an off-label basis.

13.

Ms. Bolivars overriding anxiety and side-effects related to the SSRIs startedsnowballing to the point where she could not eat, and by 2006 she weighed a mere 89pounds. Ms. Bolivar discovered that using medical marijuana enabled her to eat andthat certain strains alleviated her anxiety, depression, agoraphobia and susceptibility totriggerscircumstances that activated her PTSD symptoms. Ms. Bolivar has beenable to discontinue her use of SSRIs and Xanax, and now controls her PTSD and relatedmedical conditions much more effectively using a combination of talk therapy andmedical marijuana than she was ever able to do using pharmaceutical drugs, all ofwhich caused far worse side effects than medical marijuana.

14.Ms. Bolivar recently finished coursework for her Master of Arts degree in public policywith a 4.0 grade point average. She is currently working on her masters thesis, has

launched a nonprofit organization, works on public policy issues and as a consultant tomulti-million dollar businesses, and speaks publically in support of medical marijuanaand to help other PTSD survivors. Due to her agoraphobia, she does not believe thatshe would have ever been to speak in front of crowds if she did not have access tomedical marijuana.

15.Ms. Bolivar testified before the Board in favor of the Petition on July 15, 2015. TheBoards decision to deny the Petition has significantly hindered Ms. Bolivars ability to

obtain PTSD-specific treatment using medical marijuana.

16.Plaintiff Stephen Otero is U.S. Air Force veteran and a resident of Loveland, Colorado.He spent just over 11 years on active duty, with two combat deployments--one to Iraqand one to Afghanistan.

17.During his first deployment to Iraq, Mr. Otero worked as an investigative member of anexplosive ordinance disposal unit. He deployed in an "in-lieu-of" tasking via the U.S.Army and operated for six months primarily in and around southeast Baghdad, but asfar east as the Iranian border. Mr. Otero and his team were responsible for disruptingenemy improvised explosive device (IED)supply lines, dismantling explosive devicesand conducting post-IED strike assessments.

18.His second deployment was to Afghanistan, where he served as a combat cameraman,embedded in multiple ground combat units while supporting the Khost ProvincialReconstruction Team out of Forward Operating Base Chapman. As the lone combatphotographer working the area of operations, Mr. Otero stayed on the move from unitto unit, documenting operations and gathering intelligence imagery. While at FOBChapman he witnessed a suicide bomb attack that took the lives of seven Americangovernment civilian employees.


5/13

5

19.Mr. Oteros PTSD began to bother himseverely after returning from Afghanistan, andthe pain of overwhelming symptoms led him to self medicate with marijuana during thesummer of 2010. Approximately one month after discovering the plant, he was selectedfor random urinalysis and it was discovered that he was using marijuana. After almosttwo years of fighting the U.S. Air Force, Mr. Otero won his honorable discharge and leftthe service in March of 2012. He is the first veteran in American history to be honorablydischarged after the use of marijuana as a PTSD treatment.

20.Mr. Otero testified at the Boards July 15, 2015 hearing.

21.Plaintiff Matthew Kahl is a veteran of the U.S. Army 101st Airborne 506th Infantry and aresident of Colorado. He served in two deployments, both to Afghanistan. His firstdeployment was slated for 15 months of heavy combat as an infantryman in an eliteunit. Mr. Kahl received a number of undocumented traumatic brain injuries (TBIs)

during this deployment through close detonations of IEDs and other munitions.

22.Within months of returning home from his first tour of duty he found himself fallingapart emotionally and attempted to take his own life just two days before Christmas of2009. Mr. Kahl survived, but felt even guiltier afterwards than he had beforehand forliving when so many other good men had died.

23.Mr. Kahl nonetheless went back to work, pulling himself together largely for the sake ofthe new men coming into the unit who needed experienced hands to carry them

through the next deployment. Eight months after attempting to commit suicide, Mr.Kahl deployed again. This time he left Afghanistan in a stretcher with a severe traumaticbrain injury, fractured maxilla and multiple spinal injuries. Mr. Kahl received an officialdiagnosis of PTSD while convalescing in the Wounded Warrior Battalion at FortCampbell, Kentucky around January of 2011. He was involuntarily hospitalized for hisPTSD before being discharged in December of 2011.

24.Life for Mr. Kahl and his family was a living hell for years afterwards, and the commonpractice of psychiatry made a complete mess of his care. Almost every pharmaceuticalpsychiatric medication he was on was prescribed off-label because the FDA had notspecifically approved it to treat PTSD, and the pharmaceutical drugs rotated on a

monthly basis as Mr. Kahls psychiatrists tinkered with the mixture of prescriptiondrugs and dosages. Mr. Kahl suffered liver and kidney dysfunction as side effects frompharmaceutical drugs, without any appreciable reduction in his PTSD symptoms.

25.He finally emigrated to Colorado in June 2013 and has used marijuana to titrate off of allprescription pharmaceutical medications used to treat PTSD. Mr. Kahl is now happier,more stable, more involved, and more productive than he has been since before his first


6/13

6

deployment. Nonetheless, his treatment is hampered by the fact that his physiciancannot recommend medical marijuana for him under existing Colorado law.

26.

Plaintiff Zach Phillips served in the Navy for six months in the Iwo Jima AmphibiousStrike Group. He currently resides in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

27.He was injured while responding to a fire onboard the USS Nashville off the coast ofIran during a missile operation. Mr. Phillips helped to save Marines who were in dangerfrom the fire but fell down a ladder-well and injured his spine in the process. Mr.Phillips experience during this incident and other traumatic incidents in the servicecaused him to develop PTSD. He also suffered permanent spinal injuries.

28.His physicians prescribed Ambien for sleeplessness and Xanax for anxietyneither ofwhich is FDA-approved to treat PTSD. Both drugs had significant side effects andneither drug worked very well to treat PTSD. He also attempted to self-medicate withalcohol to treat his insomnia, but that was not very effective either.

29.Mr. Phillips uses marijuana to combat the flashbacks and anxiety. Marijuana helps himfeel more mentally clear than benzodiazepines like Xanax. He does not believe thatexisting pharmaceutical drugs are effective to treat most veterans with PTSD, and theside effects of such drugs usually outweigh the benefits.

30.Mr. Phillips receives VA compensation and social security disability payments. He liveson a fixed income and lives paycheck to paycheck. The Boards refusal to recognize

PTSD as a condition for which medical marijuana may be prescribed has harmed Mr.Phillips by limiting his ability to discuss using medical marijuana to treat his PTSDsymptoms with his physician.

31.Recreational marijuana is generally at least one-third more expensive than medicalmarijuana due to higher taxes and a lack of patient discounts. The inability to obtainmedical marijuana from a designated caregiver of their choice to treat their PTSDcauses substantial hardship to individuals like Mr. Phillips who are living on a fixedincome due to disability.

32.To summarize, Plaintiffs, and other similarly situated PTSD survivors, have been

harmed by the Defendantsarbitrary and capricious decision to deny the Petition byhaving their access to the most effective strains of medical marijuanaand theassistance of the most knowledgeable medical marijuana caregivers--denied or severelylimited. They have been harmed financially by having to obtain the limited strainsavailable to them from the significantly more expensive recreational market. And theyhave been harmed by the fact that their physicians clinical judgment to prescribe themost effective medicine available has been usurped by the Board.


7/13

7

33.The Boards decision has also harmed PTSD patients generally by impeding necessarymedical research and forcing PTSD sufferers to turn to pharmaceutical drugs that areless effective than medical marijuana and have far more serious side effects for manyPTSD patients.

IV. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

34.In November of 2000, the voters approved Amendment 20 to the Constitution of theState of Colorado, which is now codified as Article XVIII 14. Article XVIII 14provides that medical use of marijuana is legal for those suffering from debilitatingmedical conditions and provides legal protection for caregivers, individuals thatprovide medical marijuana to authorized patients.

35.Article XVIII 14(1)(a) defines debilitating medical condition as:

(I) Cancer, glaucoma, positive status for human immunodeficiencyvirus, or acquired immune deficiency syndrome, or treatment forsuch conditions;

(II) A chronic or debilitating disease or medical condition, ortreatment for such conditions, which produces, for a specificpatient, one or more of the following, and for which, in theprofessional opinion of the patients physician, such condition orconditions reasonably may be alleviated by the medical use ofmarijuana: cachexia; severe pain; severe nausea; seizures,

including those that are characteristic of epilepsy; or persistentmuscle spasms, including those that are characteristic of multiplesclerosis; or

(III) Any other medical condition, or treatment for such condition,approved by the state health agency, pursuant to its rule makingauthority or its approval of any petition submitted by a patient orphysician as provided in this section.

36.Thus, the state Constitution expressly contemplates the addition of further debilitating

conditions that qualify under the medical marijuana program.

37.The governor has designated the Colorado Department of Public Health and theEnvironment (CDPHE) as the state agency responsible for administering the medical

marijuana program. C.R.S. 18-18-406.3(d).

38.C.R.S. 25-1.5-106 sets forth the powers and duties of the CDPHE to administer thisconstitutionally authorized medical marijuana program, including the duty, to ensure


8/13

8

that patients suffering from legitimate debilitating medical conditions are able to safelygain access to medical marijuana C.R.S. 25-1.5-106(1)(a). Defendants have failed intheir duty to ensure that PTSD patients have reasonable access to medical marijuana.

39.The CDPHEs rules governing medical marijuana are set forth at 5 CCR 1006-2. Per 5CCR 1006-2, Regulation 6(A), [d]ebilitatingmedical conditions are defined as cancer,glaucoma, and infection with or positive status for human immunodeficiency virus.Patients undergoing treatment for such conditions are defined as having a debilitatingmedical condition.

40.In addition, [d]ebilitating medical condition(s) alsoincludea chronic or debilitatingdisease or medical condition other than HIV infection, cancer or glaucoma; or treatmentfor such conditions, which produces for a specific patient one or more of the following,and for which, in the professional opinion of the patients physician, such condition orconditions may reasonably be alleviated by the medical use of marijuana: cachexia;severe pain; severe nausea; seizures, including those that are characteristic of epilepsy;or persistent muscle spasms, including those that are characteristic of multiplesclerosis. 5 CCR 1006-2, Regulation 6(B).

41.5 CCR 1006-2, Regulation 6(D) provides a procedural mechanism for patients orphysicians to petition the Board to add debilitating medical conditions to the approvedlist. Upon receipt of such a petition for addition, the CDPHE Executive Director shallreview the information submitted, and, shall also conduct a search of the medicalliterature for peer-reviewed published literature of randomized controlled trials or

well-designed observational studies in humans concerning the use of marijuana for thecondition that is the subject of the petition Regulation 6(D)(1).

42.Such a petition may be denied without hearing in a set of circumstances where,effectively, there is no scientific support for the addition of the proposed debilitatingcondition. 5 CCR 1006-2, Regulation 6(D)(2).

43.The Regulations included3preliminary review of the proposed additional debilitatingcondition by the medical marijuana scientific advisory council, which shall review thepetition information presented to the department and any further medical researchrelated to the condition requested, and make recommendations to the executive

director, or his or her designee, regarding the petition. 5 CCR 1006-2, Regulation6(D)(3)(c).

3Regulation 6(D)(3) expired on May 15, 2015 per Senate Bill 15-100, but the Boardproceeded under that regulation in this case because the Petition was filed prior to May 15,2015.


9/13

9

44.Pursuant to C.R.S. 24-4-103, the Board conducted a public rule making hearing on July15, 2015 to consider modifying 5 CCR 1006-2 to add PTSD as a recognized debilitatingcondition.

45.This proposed rule was developed by the Center for Health and Environmental Data,and the Disease Control and Environmental Epidemiology Division of the CDPHEpursuant to Colorado Constitution, Article XVIII, Section 14, and C.R.S. 25-1.5-106and 106.5. In scheduling the July 15, 2015 hearing, the Board expressly solicited publicinput including written and live testimony and comments.

46.The proposed measure came with strong support and an express recommendation forapproval of the Petition from the state's Medical Marijuana Scientific Advisory Council(MMSAC) pursuant to 5 CCR 1006-2, Regulation 6(D)(3), which included the approvaland recommendation of CDPHE Executive Director and Chief Medical Officer Dr. LarryWolk.

47.C.R.S. 25-1.5-106.5 establishes a CDPHE-governed research grant program to facilitateobjective scientific research regarding the efficacy of marijuana and its componentparts as part of medical treatment. 5 CCR 1006-2, Regulation 14 further details theCDPHEs medical research grant program.

48.The CDPHE has agreed to provide $2,156,000.00 in funding for a Placebo-controlled,Triple-Blind, Randomized Crossover Pilot Study of the Safety and Efficacy of FourPotencies of Smoked Marijuana in 76 Veterans with Chronic, Treatment- Resistant Post

Traumatic Stress Disorder.

49.But sadly, this grant money has not been utilized yet despite being awarded inDecember 2014. Due to delays from layers of federal government red tape, it is unclearwhen the PTSD/marijuana randomized controlled trial will commence. And in fact,published data from this study will not be available to the public for four years.

50.The data from the study reaches the level of rigor that the Board was demanding, butThe study was submitted to the FDA in 2010 and will not have published data until2019. This is evidence of the way marijuana efficacy research has been systematicallyimpeded in the U.S. Demanding randomized controlled trials before medical marijuana

can be recommended to treat PTSD under Colorado law is an unreasonable standardbecause it cannot be attained in a reasonably timely manner, and does not address theimmediate needs of PTSD patients. While the government delays, thousands ofindividuals suffer needlessly.

51.Suzanne Sisley, M.D., is a groundbreaking researcher, recently with the University ofArizona, who has been working since 2010 with the nonprofit Multidisciplinary


10/13

10

Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) to initiate the aforementioned study of thesafety and effectiveness of whole-plant marijuana for symptoms of PTSD in veterans.

52.

Dr. Sisley's research proposal received the approval of the U.S Food and DrugAdministrationa high hurdle, since marijuana is still categorized as a Schedule 1 drugby the federal governmentand the University of Arizona Institutional Review Board;in March of 2015. Her study became the first whole-plant medical marijuana drugdevelopment research project to obtain approval from the U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services to purchase marijuana from the National Institute on Drug Abuse,which has a monopoly on marijuana used for federally-approved research in thiscountry.

53.Dr. Sisley testified at the July 15, 2015 hearing, but she was limited to two minutes oftestimony despite being among the nations leading PTSD researchers and a CDPHEgrant recipient. The Board abused its discretion by limiting Dr. Sisleys testimony totwo minutes, thus denying proponents of the Petition to present the most pertinentscientific testimony in favor of the Petition.

54.The evidence presented at the July 15,2015 hearing included research conductedbetween 2009 and 2011 in New Mexico--the first state to authorize treating PTSD withmedical marijuana--which reported a 75 percent decrease in three major PTSDsymptoms in patients. This research used the VA-approved Clinically AdministeredPTSD Scale (CAPS) method, which studiesthe presences of PTSD experiences and thepatientsresponses to them, and supports a conclusion that using medical marijuana is

associated with PTSD symptom reduction in some patients. This peer-reviewed studywas published in the newest special issue of the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs. SeeGeorge R. Greer, Charles S. Grob, Adam L. Halberstadt. PTSD Symptom Reports ofPatients Evaluated for the New Mexico Medical Cannabis Program,Journal ofPsychoactive Drugs, 2014; 46 (1): 73 DOI:10.1080/02791072.2013.873843.

55.A second study discussed at the July 15, 2015 hearing concluded that, [w]hile furtherresearch into cannabinoid treatment effects on PTSD symptoms is required, theevaluated evidence indicates that substantial numbers of military veterans with PTSDuse cannabis or derivative products to control PTSD symptoms, with some patientsreporting benefits in terms of reduced anxiety and insomnia and improved coping

ability.Use and effects of cannabinoids in military veterans with posttraumatic stressdisorderBetthauser K, et al. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2015.

56.Both of these studies are consistent with the testimony presented at the July 15, 2015hearingmedical marijuana is effective for treating PTSD for many patients sufferingfrom the condition.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2013.873843http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2013.873843


11/13

11

57.More than 50 members of the public presented testimony at the July 15, 2015 hearing,and only two individuals, without scientific data, testified against the addition of PTSDto the qualifying list.

58.Despite the MMSAC and Dr. Wolksrecommendation and support, the Board denied thePetition following the July 15, 2015 hearing by a vote of six to two against, citing a lackof sufficient scientific evidence.

59.The CDPHE and the Board have never granted a petition to add a debilitating condition,and have denied at least 13 such petitions since 2001.

60.The Board denied the Petition in part because the addition of PTSD was not supportedby a randomized controlled study. But this establishes an arbitrary and unattainablestandard because the federal government has refused to allow the grant-approvedwork of Dr. Sisley and Marcel O. Bonn-Miller to move forward. Thus, the Board made adecision based upon a standard that cannot currently be attained, leaving PTSD patientsto suffer in the meantime.

61.The following states have approved PTSD as a qualifying condition for their medicalmarijuana programs: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, and Oregon. The territory of Guam andWashington D.C. also permit use of medical marijuana to treat PTSD symptoms. Manyof these states relied on the very same information provided by Dr. Sisley at the July 15,2015 hearing in doing so.

62.Arizona recognized medical marijuana as a legitimate treatment for PTSD following thedecision in In re Arizona Cannabis Nurses Assn., 2014A-MMR-0254-DHS (AZ Office ofAdmin. Hearings, June 4, 2014). In that case, Administrative Law Judge ThomasSheddon held that testimony demonstrating that patients suffering from PTSD receiveda palliative effect from medical marijuanacoupled with the New Mexico studyreferenced above and testimony that prescribing medical marijuana was consistentwith clinicians use of other off-label drugs to treat PTSD--was sufficient to meet theAppellants burden of proof to list PTSD as a qualifying condition.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Judicial Review Pursuant to C.R.S. 24-4-106)

63.Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding allegations as if fully set forth herein.

64.The Boards action in denying the Petition was arbitrary and capricious, contrary toPlaintiffs constitutional right to use medical marijuana, in excess of the Boards

statutory jurisdiction, authority, purposes, and limitations, not in accord with the


12/13

12

procedures or procedural limitations required by law, an abuse or clearly unwarrantedexercise of discretion, based upon findings of fact that are clearly erroneous on thewhole record, unsupported by substantial evidence when the record is considered as awhole, and otherwise contrary to law.

65.Thus, this Court should hold unlawful and set aside the Boards action and order theBoard to recognize PTSD as a debilitating condition for which physicians may properlyprescribe medical marijuana.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully ask this Court to:

a) Enter an order directing the CDPHE and the Board to add PTSD as a recognizeddebilitating condition for which a physician may prescribe medical marijuana.

b)

Award Plaintiffs their reasonable costs of suit and such other relief as this Courtdeems just and proper.

DESIGNATION OF RECORD

Plaintiffs designate the following documents as relevant parts of the record pursuant toC.R.S. 24-4-106(6):

1. The original or certified copies of all pleadings, applications, evidence, exhibits,complaints, studies, correspondence and other papers presented to and/or consideredby the CDPHE and/or the Board related to the Petition.

2. A complete transcript of the hearing held before the Board on July 15, 2015.

3. Any and all written orders or opinions issued by the Board pertinent to this suit.

4. An offer of proof in the form of an affidavit setting forth Dr. Sisleys anticipatedtestimony if the Board had not abused its discretion and instead granted her areasonable amount of time to testify at the July 15, 2015 hearing.

Respectfully submitted this 19thday of August, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

by:/s/C. Adam FosterC. Adam Foster, Reg. #35969(original signature on file)


13/13

13

Plaintiffs Address:

C/O Hoban & Feola, LLC

730 17thStreet, Suite 405Denver, Colorado 80202

cdphe complaint

Documents