Cannabis titans Acreage Holdings Inc. and Verano Holdings are firing back at class action lawsuits that accuse them of gaming Illinois marijuana laws by deceptively labeling high-THC products. This week, both multistate cannabis operators filed motions in Illinois federal courts, urging judges to toss the consumer fraud cases, calling them baseless and speculative.

The lawsuits, part of a growing trend of litigation targeting the booming cannabis industry, claim Acreage and Verano sold cannabis-infused products (CIPs) that exceeded Illinois’s strict 100-milligram THC limit per package by branding them as cannabis concentrates, a category that enjoys looser regulation.

Defendants: “No Misrepresentation, No Case”

In synchronized motions filed Wednesday, both companies—represented by the same legal team—argued that the suits lack a central ingredient for any fraud case: a clear misstatement.

“This case lacks the most fundamental element of a consumer fraud class action: an actual misrepresentation,” the defendants said bluntly.

They further argue that the plaintiffs failed to identify any specific misleading claim, nor did they actually buy most of the products listed in their complaints—undermining their legal standing. The cannabis products under scrutiny, the companies added, had already cleared state regulatory hurdles for both medical and recreational use.

A Web of Identical Lawsuits

The cases are among a slew of near-identical complaints filed across Illinois, all spearheaded by attorneys Laura Luisi and Jamie Holz of Luisi Holz Law, who appear to be leading a coordinated legal blitz against marijuana producers.

The plaintiffs argue that cannabis firms are exploiting a labeling loophole: Illinois caps THC potency in cannabis-infused products but not in cannabis concentrates. By marketing CIPs as concentrates, plaintiffs allege, companies are knowingly deceiving consumers and circumventing the law.

Legal Salvos: “Shotgun Pleading” and Lack of Standing

Acreage and Verano’s legal teams did not mince words. They slammed the complaints for employing "improper group pleading" and "shotgun-style pleading", accusing the plaintiffs of sweeping accusations without backing them up with specifics—especially regarding product purchases and the alleged mislabeling.

Because the named plaintiffs didn’t purchase many of the products listed, the companies assert that the lawsuits should be dismissed outright for lack of standing.

Who’s Representing Whom?

• Plaintiffs vs. Verano:
  Represented by James Zouras, Catherine Mitchell Duffy, Anna Ceragioli, and Gillian Kimmons of Stephan Zouras, along with Laura Luisi and Jamie Holz of Luisi Holz Law.

• Plaintiffs vs. Acreage:
  Represented by Kyle Shamberg of Carroll Shamberg LLC, and again, Luisi and Holz.

• Acreage & Verano:
  Both defended by Casey T. Grabenstein and Elizabeth A. Thompson of Saul Ewing LLP.

Waiting on the Judges — and the Industry Watches Closely

As of Friday, none of the parties responded to media requests for comment. But with the cannabis market booming and regulatory scrutiny tightening, these lawsuits could become a legal litmus test for how far marijuana companies can go in stretching product categories—and whether consumers and courts will let them.