COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Commitments The Company does not have significant future annual commitments, other than related to leases and debt, which are disclosed in Notes 10 and 11, respectively, and certain payments related to acquisitions, as disclosed in Note 4. Legal and Other Matters The Company’s operations are subject to a variety of local and state regulations. Failure to comply with one or more of those regulations could result in fines, restrictions on its operations, or losses of permits that could result in the Company ceasing operations. While management believes that the Company is in compliance with applicable local and state regulations as of March 31, 2023 in all material respects, cannabis regulations continue to evolve and are subject to differing interpretations, and accordingly, the Company may be subject to regulatory fines, penalties, or restrictions in the future. State laws that permit and regulate the production, distribution, and use of cannabis for adult use or medical purposes are in direct conflict with the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 811) (the “CSA”), which makes cannabis use and possession federally illegal. Although certain states and territories of the United States authorize medical and/or adult use cannabis production and distribution by licensed or registered entities, under United States federal law, the possession, use, cultivation, and transfer of cannabis and any related drug paraphernalia is illegal and any such acts are criminal acts under federal law under the CSA. Although the Company’s activities are believed to be compliant with applicable state and local laws, strict compliance with state and local laws with respect to cannabis may neither absolve the Company of liability under United States federal law, nor may it provide a defense to any federal proceeding which may be brought against the Company. The Company may be, from time to time, subject to various administrative, regulatory, and other legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. Contingent liabilities associated with legal proceedings are recorded when a liability is probable and the contingent liability can be estimated. We do not accrue for contingent losses that, in our judgment, are considered to be reasonably possible but not probable. At March 31, 2023 there were no pending or threatened lawsuits that could reasonably be expected to have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations, other than as disclosed below. MedMen NY Litigation On February 25, 2021, the Company entered into a definitive investment agreement (the “Investment Agreement”) with subsidiaries of MedMen Enterprises Inc. (“MedMen”), under which we would have, subject to regulatory approval, completed an investment (the “Investment”) of approximately $73,000 in MedMen NY, Inc. (“MMNY”), a licensed medical cannabis operator in the state of New York. Following the completion of the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement, we were expected to hold all the outstanding equity of MMNY. Specifically, the Investment Agreement provided that at closing, the Company was going to pay to MedMen’s senior lenders $35,000, less certain transaction costs and a prepaid deposit of $4,000, and AWH New York, LLC was going to issue a senior secured promissory note in favor of MMNY’s senior secured lender in the principal amount of $28,000, guaranteed by AWH, which cash investment and note would be used to reduce the amounts owed to MMNY’s senior secured lender. Following its investment, AWH would hold a controlling interest in MMNY equal to approximately 86.7% of the equity in MMNY, and be provided with an option to acquire MedMen’s remaining interest in MMNY in the future for a nominal additional payment, which option the Company intended to exercise. The Investment Agreement also required AWH to make an additional investment of $10,000 in MMNY, which investment would also be used to repay MMNY’s senior secured lender, if adult-use cannabis sales commenced in MMNY’s dispensaries. The Company contends that, in December 2021, the parties to the Investment Agreement received the required approvals from the State of New York to close the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement, but MedMen has disputed the adequacy of the approvals provided by the State of New York. The Company delivered notice to MedMen in December 2021 that it wished to close the transactions as required by the Investment Agreement. Nevertheless, MedMen, on January 2, 2022, gave notice to the Company that MedMen purported to terminate the Investment Agreement. Following receipt of such notice, on January 13, 2022, the Company filed a complaint against MedMen and others in the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the “Court”), requesting specific performance that the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement must move forward, and such other relief as the Court may deem appropriate. The Company simultaneously moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (the “Motion”) requiring MedMen to operate its New York business in the ordinary course of business and to refrain from any activities or transactions that might impair, encumber, or dissipate MedMen’s New York assets. The parties resolved the Motion via a “Stipulation and Order” entered by the Court on January 21, 2022 that requires that MMNY operate only in compliance with the law and in a manner consistent with its ordinary course of business that preserves all assets of MMNY. It further requires MMNY to not take certain actions, including any actions that would have a material adverse effect on MedMen’s NY business. On March 27, 2023, the parties entered a further stipulation that would modify the January 21, 2022 Stipulation and Order, but that modification has not been approved by the Court. Accordingly, the Stipulation and Order remains in place until trial. The Stipulation and Order also set an initial schedule for the litigation. On January 24, 2022, MedMen filed counterclaims against the Company, alleging that Ascend had breached the Investment Agreement, and seeking declaratory relief that MedMen had properly terminated the Investment Agreement. On February 14, 2022, the Company moved to dismiss MedMen’s counterclaims and filed an amended complaint (the “First Amended Complaint”) that included additional claims against MedMen for breach of contract. The First Amended Complaint contained several causes of action, including for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The First Amended Complaint sought damages in addition to continuing to seek injunctive and declaratory relief. On March 7, 2022, MedMen filed amended counterclaims, an answer, and affirmative defenses to the First Amended Counterclaim. On March 28, 2022, the Company moved to dismiss MedMen’s amended counterclaims. On April 20, 2022, the parties entered into a stipulation extending the time for MedMen to oppose the Company’s motion to dismiss until May 5, 2022. In addition, the parties agreed to stay all discovery, including both party and non-party discovery. On May 5, 2022, the parties filed another stipulation order with the Court adjourning until further notice from the Court MedMen’s time to oppose the Company’s motion to dismiss MedMen’s amended counterclaims. The parties again stipulated that all discovery remains stayed pending further order from the Court. On May 10, 2022, the Company and MedMen signed a term sheet (the “Term Sheet”), pursuant to which the parties agreed to use best efforts to enter into a settlement agreement and enter into new or amended transactional documents. Specifically, if consummated, the agreements contemplated by the Term Sheet would entail, among other things, the Company paying MedMen $15,000 in additional transaction consideration, and MedMen withdrawing its counterclaims against the Company. Per the amended transaction terms contemplated in the Term Sheet, upon closing, the Company would receive a 99.99% controlling interest in MMNY and the Company would pay MedMen $74,000, which reflected the original transaction consideration plus an additional $11,000 per the parties’ term sheet, less a $4,000 deposit that the Company already paid. The amended transaction terms contemplated in the Term Sheet also would have required MedMen to provide a representation and warranty that the status of the MMNY assets has not materially changed since December 31, 2021 and an acknowledgement that the representations and warranties from the Investment Agreement will survive for three months after the closing of the contemplated transactions. After the Company determined that MedMen cannot make or provide the representations and warranties MedMen would have been required to make as part of the contemplated transactions, the Company determined that it no longer intends to consummate the contemplated transactions. On September 30, 2022, the Company sought leave from the Court to file a second amended complaint (the “Second Amended Complaint”). The Second Amended Complaint contains breach of contract claims against MedMen, as well as a claim for the breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and a claim for anticipatory breach of contract. In connection with those claims, the Company is no longer seeking injunctive or declaratory relief; however, the Company continues to seek damages from MedMen, including, but not limited to, the return of the $4,000 deposit, approximately $2,400 of advances pursuant to a working capital loan agreement (as described in Note 6, “Notes Receivable”) and other capital expenditure advances paid to MMNY by the Company. On November 21, 2022, the parties entered into a stipulation whereby MedMen agreed to the filing of the Second Amended Complaint, which is now the operative pleading in the litigation. In addition, in the stipulation, the Company agreed that it would not contest MedMen’s filing of second amended counterclaims against the Company while reserving all rights with respect to any such counterclaims, including the right to move to dismiss any amended counterclaims. Because the parties agreed to the filing of each side’s amended pleadings, on November 28, 2022, the Court determined that Ascend’s March 2022 motion to dismiss was moot. On December 21, 2022, MedMen filed amended counterclaims, an answer, and affirmative defenses to the Company’s Second Amended Complaint. In addition to the allegations in MedMen’s earlier pleadings, MedMen now also alleges that the Company breached the Term Sheet. On January 20, 2023, the Company moved to dismiss MedMen’s amended counterclaims. The briefing on the Company’s motion to dismiss was completed as of March 3, 2023. The parties are awaiting a decision from the Court on the motion to dismiss. Following the Company’s decision to no longer consummate the contemplated transactions, during the third quarter of 2022, the Company expensed a total of $1,704 of capitalized costs, primarily consisting of capital expenditures or deposits that were incurred for certain locations. Additionally, during the fourth quarter of 2022, the Company established an estimated reserve of $3,700 related to the remaining amounts that it is actively pursuing collecting. The Company determined that the estimated reserve remained adequate as of March 31, 2023 and is included within “Other current assets” on the unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022. |