O'Brien Sues Goldberg and Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission

Lawsuit Targets Chair O'Brien and Commission Actions

Title's complaint names both O'Brien individually and the Cannabis Control Commission as defendants, seeking declaratory relief and damages under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 30A. The filing alleges O'Brien conducted deliberations outside public sessions in violation of the Open Meeting Law and targeted Title for her vocal support of social equity applicants. Title served as one of the commission's original five members from 2017 to 2021, frequently clashing with O'Brien over licensing priorities and enforcement decisions.

The complaint says O'Brien convened at least three meetings in early 2021 without proper public notice, discussing personnel matters and enforcement policy. Title argues those sessions violated Chapter 30A, Section 20, which requires advance posting and public access for all deliberative gatherings of a quorum. The suit doesn't specify monetary damages. It requests a judicial declaration that the meetings were unlawful and an injunction barring future violations.

O'Brien became chair in 2019 after the commission's initial leadership restructuring. Title resigned in March 2021, citing frustration with the pace of equity-license approvals and what she described as procedural obstruction by fellow commissioners. The two haven't appeared together at public cannabis events since.

Retaliation Claims Tied to Equity Advocacy

Title alleges O'Brien retaliated against her for championing equity applicants, including blocking Title's access to commission staff and excluding her from key votes. The complaint cites three incidents in late 2020 and early 2021 when Title was denied information requests related to social equity program metrics and applicant appeals. She contends O'Brien instructed commission staff not to respond to Title's inquiries without prior approval from the chair's office, effectively isolating Title from operational data.

Massachusetts law protects commissioners from retaliation for exercising their statutory duties. Title's suit invokes the state Whistleblower Protection Act, arguing her advocacy for equity licensees constituted protected activity. A commission spokesperson declined to comment on pending litigation.

Title now directs the Parabola Center, a cannabis policy nonprofit based in Los Angeles. She's testified before the Massachusetts legislature twice since leaving the commission, urging lawmakers to strip the CCC of discretionary authority over equity-program funding. For full background on this story, see the CannIntel topic hub on the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission.

What Happens Next in Suffolk Superior Court

Judge Maria Lopez drew the case. An initial scheduling conference is set for September 15, 2026. Title's attorneys haven't yet filed a motion for preliminary injunction, suggesting they'll pursue discovery before seeking interim relief. O'Brien and the commission have 20 days from service to answer or move to dismiss.

Open Meeting Law cases in Massachusetts typically turn on whether a quorum deliberated outside a posted session. If Title can document emails or meeting notes showing substantive discussion among three or more commissioners, she has a strong claim. The retaliation count faces a higher bar: Title must prove O'Brien acted with retaliatory intent, not merely policy disagreement.

Watch for O'Brien's next move. Will she move to dismiss on immunity grounds or answer on the merits? That filing is due by September 12.