Asoc Farmacias De La Comunidad De Pr v. Dispensario Farmaverde La Central LLC
KLRA202500166
Tribunal De Apelaciones De Pue...May 22, 2025Background
- The Asociación de Farmacias de la Comunidad de Puerto Rico filed an administrative complaint against Dispensario FarmaVerde La Central, LLC, a licensed cannabis dispensary, alleging unlawful use of the word “Farma” (from "farmacia") in its trade name.
- The Association argued that “FarmaVerde” induced public confusion by implying the dispensary operated as a pharmacy, in violation of the Puerto Rico Pharmacy Act and related regulations prohibiting certain terms and symbols for non-pharmacy establishments.
- FarmaVerde argued its name was approved by the Medical Cannabis Regulatory Board and the Puerto Rico Department of State, and it does not explicitly use the term “farmacia.”
- The Department of Health ruled in favor of FarmaVerde, declaring the complaint unfounded, which the Association sought to overturn on judicial review.
- The central issue was whether the use of "Farma" (or similar lexemes) in a cannabis dispensary name violates express statutory or regulatory prohibitions on misleading the public into believing a business is a licensed pharmacy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use of “Farma” in trade name violates Pharmacy Act | “Farma” induces confusion; violates law against such use | “Farma” is not expressly banned; approved by regulators | Not a violation without express ban |
| Does trade name registration validate otherwise-illegal naming practices? | Registration doesn’t exempt compliance | License/registration shows naming is permissible | Mere registration doesn’t exempt compliance |
| Applicability of banned words to cannabis dispensaries | Statute also intends to cover cannabis dispensaries | Law’s intent is to regulate pharmacies, not licensed dispensaries | Law/regulation not intended for dispensaries |
| Deference to agency ruling | Department misapplied law | Agency’s interpretation is reasonable and within its expertise | Judicial deference to agency; ruling upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Hernández Feliciano v. Municipio de Quebradillas, 211 DPR _ (2023) (standard on judicial deference to administrative agency decisions)
- O.E.G. v. Martínez Giraud, 210 DPR _ (2022) (outlines scope and limits of judicial review of administrative actions)
- Super Asphalt v. AFI y otro, 206 DPR 803 (2021) (administrative findings must be supported by substantial evidence)
- Graciani Rodríguez v. Garaje Isla Verde, 202 DPR 117 (2019) (administrative agency decisions presumed correct; courts defer absent contrary evidence)
- Rolón Martínez v. Supte. Policía, 201 DPR 26 (2018) (agency interpretation subject to total review if erroneous application of law)
- Torres Rivera v. Policía de PR, 196 DPR 606 (2016) (criteria for judicial intervention in administrative actions)