Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF PHARMACY vs PZ PHARMACY, INC., 00-002262 (2000)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 00-002262 Visitors: 2
Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF PHARMACY
Respondent: PZ PHARMACY, INC.
Judges: CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON
Agency: Department of Health
Locations: Miami, Florida
Filed: May 30, 2000
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Thursday, August 24, 2000.

Latest Update: Jul. 07, 2024
a FILED . = STATE OF FLORIDA ; DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH OOMAY 30 PH 3:5 | bivis is i OF ; DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Petitioner, Vs. CASE NO. 96-12216 PZ PHARMACY, INC. 2g 4 wy “ Respondent. 0 0 a . / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT COMES NOW the Petitioner, Department of Health, and files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Pharmacy against the Respondent, PZ PHARMACY, poo .- JNC., and in support thereof would state: “ : __...1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of Pharmacy i pursuant to Section 20. 43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 455, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 465, Florida Statutes. PE OE 2. Pursuant to the authority of Section 20.43(3)(g), Florida Statutes, the Petitioner has contracted with the Agency ‘for Health ‘Care Administration, hereinafter referred to as ‘ as the "Agency,! to provide consumer complaint, investigative, and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality Assurance, councils or board, as appropriate, including ‘the issuance of emergency 7 orders of suspension or restriction. 3. Respondent has been at all times pertinent hereto, a duly licensed pharmacy d _pursuant to Chapter 465, Florida Statutes, having been issued license number PH ; : 0013771. pe receipe teres cme ene page 4. Respondent's last known address is 5872 West Flagler, Miami, Florida 33144. | 5. On June 3, 1996 an additional inspection was performed by agents of the Petitioner. As a result it was discovered: a. The Respondent was in possession of pre packed cards of prescription drugs not labeled with lot numbers, manufacture’s name or expiration dates. b. The Respondent stored medications outside the confines of the prescription department as routine stock even when the pharmacist was not on duty. c. At the time of the inspection there was no pharmacist on duty, and the pharmacy had no closed sign, nor was it locked. 6. The conduct of the Respondent as aforesaid is contrary to the provisions contained in Sections 465. 023(1)(¢) and 499.007(2)(a), Florida Statutes, by failing to - have prescription drugs labeled with the manufacturer's name, jot number and expiration dates; Rule 64B16- 28. 120(1), Florida Administrative Code, by failing to have all prescription ‘medications located within the prescription department; Rule 64B16- ~~ 28.109(1), Florida Administrative Code, by failing to have a pharmacist present and on duty and failure to display a closed sign or secure the pharmacy department. = re WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Pharmacy to enter an Order imposing one or more of the penalties proscribed by law, together with any other and further relief deemed just under the circumstances. : SIGNED inielthay of Poul , 2000. Robert G. Brooks, M.D. Secretary, Department of Health DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DEPUTY CLERK By: Nancy M. Snurkowski cin Webi RA ; Chief Attorney pate__{- AU: Qove On Behalf of the Agency for Health Care Administration ». COUNSEL FOR AGENCY: wrence F, Kranert, Jr. enior Attorney Florida Bar No. 0171063 i 1 Counsel's Office - MQA Practitioner Regulation > lori 30517-4209 650 487-2225 LFK/t Pop: WAR UJI [eo

Docket for Case No: 00-002262
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer