Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost has filed an antitrust lawsuit against nine of the nation’s largest multistate cannabis operators (MSOs), accusing them of colluding to limit competition, crowd out independent Ohio businesses, and keep marijuana prices artificially high.
In announcing the lawsuit Thursday, Yost alleged the publicly traded cannabis companies engaged in what he described as an “industry-wide scheme” designed to reduce product choice and disadvantage small, in-state operators. The conduct, he said, violates Ohio’s antitrust laws, which are intended to protect fair competition and consumers.
“Ohio’s antitrust laws protect competition and consumers, not backroom deals that rig the system for a select few,” Yost said in a statement.
The companies named in the lawsuit are: Ascend Wellness Holdings, Ayr Wellness, The Cannabist Company, Cresco Labs, Curaleaf Holdings, Green Thumb Industries, Jushi Holdings, Trulieve Cannabis Corp., and Verano Holdings.
Alleged Collusion and Market Control
According to the complaint, the MSOs coordinated their business practices to suppress competition in Ohio and other states. Yost alleges the companies used several tactics to maintain market dominance, including reciprocal purchasing agreements in which MSOs agreed to stock one another’s products across multiple states while limiting or eliminating purchases from independent cultivators and processors.
The lawsuit also claims the companies exchanged competitively sensitive, non-public information and implemented discriminatory supply and promotional arrangements that favored fellow MSOs over smaller operators.
State investigators allege that senior representatives from the companies reached agreements as early as late 2022 to preserve shelf space for one another during a period of increasing cannabis supply and declining prices. Some companies allegedly established internal purchasing quotas that were negotiated at the national level, according to the attorney general’s office.
“These reciprocal purchasing agreements were designed to push small Ohio businesses out of the market,” Yost said, adding that the conduct has gone largely unchallenged until now.
The lawsuit argues the alleged conspiracies reduced product quality, limited consumer choice, stifled innovation, and resulted in higher-than-competitive prices across Ohio’s cannabis market.
Impact on Ohio’s Cannabis Landscape
According to the complaint, 13 of Ohio’s 60 counties that currently have cannabis retailers are served exclusively by MSO-owned stores, highlighting what Yost characterizes as a growing concentration of market power.
Ohio launched adult-use marijuana sales in 2024, and the state recorded approximately $1.06 billion in cannabis sales in 2025, the first full year of legalization. There are currently 190 licensed dispensaries selling both medical and adult-use cannabis statewide.
Growth opportunities for new operators remain limited. A statewide cap of 400 total cannabis licenses is set to take effect in March, and Ohio law allows vertically integrated operators while limiting companies to no more than eight medical marijuana dispensary licenses and one cultivator and processor license. The state currently has 37 licensed cultivators.
Limited-license frameworks are often favored by both large and small cannabis companies as a way to avoid oversupply and price compression seen in uncapped markets such as California, Michigan, and Oregon. However, Yost’s lawsuit argues that the MSOs exploited these structural limits to entrench their dominance.
Ohio Industry Response
Several of the named companies have pushed back on the allegations. Jushi Holdings said it disputes the claims and plans to defend itself.
“We respectfully disagree with the allegations against Jushi and believe the complaint reflects several mischaracterizations,” said Trent Woloveck, Jushi’s chief strategy officer. He added that the company does significant business with Ohio-based single-state operators and does not provide preferential treatment to any class of licensee.
Green Thumb Industries said it does not comment on pending litigation. Other companies named in the lawsuit have not publicly responded.
Investigation Origins
Yost said the investigation began after his office received an anonymous tip in October 2024 from an Ohio cannabis industry employee. The tipster alleged that MSOs were coordinating to prioritize one another’s products in dispensaries while reducing purchases from independent Ohio operators.
The attorney general’s office contends the alleged conduct extended beyond Ohio and mirrors similar arrangements in other states where the same companies operate.
The lawsuit now heads to Franklin County court, where it could have significant implications not only for Ohio’s cannabis market but also for how multistate operators structure supply and retail relationships nationwide.
Antitrust scrutiny and enforcement actions like this underscore the importance of compliant supply agreements, pricing strategies, and retail relationships – especially in limited-license and vertically integrated markets. As regulators increase oversight, cannabis businesses should proactively review their operations to ensure they align with state and federal competition laws.
Canna Business Services works with cannabis operators nationwide to navigate complex regulatory environments, mitigate legal and compliance risk, and build sustainable, defensible business models. Our team can help you stay compliant while remaining competitive – schedule a free consultation with us to find out more!
