A prominent multi-state cannabis operator has taken legal action aimed at reshaping how hemp-derived THC products are sold and regulated. On October 24, 2025, a subsidiary of Jushi Holdings Inc.—identified as Dalitso LLC—filed a lawsuit in Virginia state court alleging that DoorDash, Total Wine & More and other businesses illegally marketed and delivered intoxicating hemp-derived products in violation of Virginia’s laws.
What the lawsuit says
Dalitso (operating dispensaries under Jushi) claims that products sold by defendants were disguised as “hemp” but in fact constituted unregulated and illegally potent THC products, sidestepping the stringent oversight that licensed cannabis operators face. The complaint states:
“Disguised as lawful ‘hemp,’ these products are, in reality, potent and dangerous forms of marijuana, offered without the mandatory safeguards, testing, or oversight that the Commonwealth imposes on licensed cannabis operators such as Plaintiff.”
According to court documents, one key example provided is a four-pack sold at a Total Wine store in Arlington, Virginia, of a product called Coastalo THC Red Cream Soda, containing 5.65 mg of total THC, which reportedly exceeds Virginia’s legal limit of 2 mg THC per package for what can be sold as hemp. The lawsuit alleges that DoorDash delivered such products across the Commonwealth, providing an “unlawful economic advantage” to companies bypassing cannabis-market licensing.
Dalitso is seeking statutory and compensatory damages (including triple-damages under Virginia’s business-conspiracy statute) and injunctive relief to halt the sale/delivery of such products.
Timeline & context
- October 24, 2025: Complaint filed in Virginia Circuit Court.
- January 2025: DoorDash announced it would begin offering hemp-derived THC and CBD products via its platform in select states, including partnering with Total Wine among others. The lawsuit references this expansion as part of the claimed chain of distribution.
- The lawsuit comes amid broader regulatory pressure across states seeking to crack down on intoxicating hemp products and calls by attorneys general for federal reform of the hemp definition.
Why this matters
Licensed cannabis operators vs. hemp-derived products
Licensed MSOs like Jushi operate under rigorous regulatory frameworks—seed-to-sale tracking, strict packaging/testing, taxation, local zoning. The complaint argues that certain hemp-derived products evade this model yet directly compete for consumer dollars. That competitive imbalance is at the heart of the legal claim.
Regulatory grey zones and compliance risk
Hemp-derived products (including delta-8/delta-10, THCa, beverages) have grown rapidly in consumer markets under relatively light regulation in many states. Legal ambiguity creates compliance risk, consumer-safety concerns, and legal liability for unlicensed delivery services. The lawsuit highlights how delivery platforms may become entwined in regulatory fallout. MORE ABOUT: The Maine Wire
Delivery services as distribution vector
By including DoorDash and delivery service channels in the lawsuit, the operator is shining a spotlight on how the product distribution chain extends beyond storefronts into digital and gig-economy infrastructures. If the claim succeeds, it could affect how delivery services vet products and partners for hemp/THC compliance. MORE ABOUT: Ganjapreneur
Policy and market implications
- States that restrict or ban intoxicating hemp products may view this case as precedent for enforcement against grey-market competitors.
- Delivery platforms may face heightened scrutiny or regulatory requirements around cannabinoids.
- Hemp-derived THC brands may need to reformulate or adapt to keep market access, especially where regulatory limits are stricter than licensed cannabis categories.
- MSOs may increasingly use litigation as a tool to protect licensed market turf and challenge what they view as unfair competition.
What’s next
- Legal proceedings: Jushi-Dalitso’s claim is still at the filing stage. Outcomes could include summary judgment, settlement, or full trial. The company has requested a jury trial.
- Regulatory alignment: States such as Virginia are already debating legal adult-use retail frameworks, and this lawsuit may influence legislative or regulatory changes. MORE HERE: Marijuana Moment
- Delivery platform risk assessment: Companies like DoorDash may reassess their vetting of cannabinoid product partners, particularly for states with strict THC or licensing limits.
- Industry positioning: Licensed cannabis firms may use this case to press for stronger enforcement of hemp-derived products or for clearer delineation between hemp and marijuana jurisdictions.
A Landmark Case
What appears on the surface as a business lawsuit between a cannabis company and large retailers/delivery services is actually emblematic of a deeper shift in the cannabis/hemp landscape. The core dispute: who should legitimately sell products with intoxicating THC, under what rules, and through what distribution channels?
For licensed cannabis operators, the entry of hemp-derived THC into mainstream retail and delivery channels represents both a competitive threat and a regulatory liability. For regulators and consumers, it spotlights consumer safety, product oversight, and distribution integrity. And for delivery services, it raises a strategic red flag: in the fast-moving world of cannabinoids, operating in grey zones could carry significant legal and reputational risk.
In short: The lawsuit from Jushi-Dalitso against DoorDash, Total Wine & More may become a landmark case. It could shape how hemp-derived THC is regulated, distributed and integrated into—or kept separate from—the licensed cannabis universe. With tens of millions at stake and regulatory reform looming, the industry will be watching every move.