Redbud Remedies, LLC v. Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission, [Ms. CL-2023-0352; CL-2023-0697, Mar. 29, 2024] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. Civ. App. 2024). The court (Per Curiam, with all judges concurring) dismisses Redbud Remedies, LLC’s (“Redbud”) appeal from the Montgomery Circuit Court’s judgment entered denying its request for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission (“the AMCC”) which denied Redbud’s request for a license.
The court notes that Redbud expressly invoked § 41-22-10, Ala. Code 1975, which provides, in pertinent part: “The validity or applicability of a rule may be determined in an action for a declaratory judgment or its enforcement stayed by injunctive relief in the circuit court of Montgomery County....” Ms. *8.
Redbud named the AMCC in the caption of its complaint and did not name any state official. Citing Ex parte Moulton, 116 So. 3d 1119, 1141 (Ala. 2013), where “the Supreme Court recognized that state agencies are immune from suits seeking injunctive relief; only state officials acting in their representative capacities may be sued in actions for injunctions,” the court holds that Redbud failed to invoke the subject matter jurisdiction of the circuit court and that all proceedings in the action were void, including the judgments from which Redbud appealed. Ms. *15.
The court holds that Redbud’s addressing service to Cannabis Commission c/o John McMillan Director, did not make the director a party to the case.” Ms. **8-9.
Rule 4(c)(7), Ala. R. Civ. P., requires a party serving the state or a state agency to serve both “the officer responsible for the administration of the ... agency” and the attorney general. Redbud argues the fact that it did not attempt to serve the attorney general in this case “indicates that it intended to serve the director as a representative of the individual commissioners. Again, nothing in the record substantiates that Redbud intended to name the director or the commissioners as defendants in any capacity. Instead, it appears that Redbud simply failed to serve the attorney general in a case in which it named the AMCC as the lone defendant.” Ms. **11-12.