Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF PHARMACY
Respondent: PET MED EXPRESS
Judges: LARRY J. SARTIN
Agency: Department of Health
Locations: Pompano Beach, Florida
Filed: Oct. 19, 2000
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Friday, November 3, 2000.
Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
ren
ata
STATE OF FLORIDA rth E D
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH -00 OCT 19 A
VIS GU
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ADMINIST
HEARINGS
Petitioner,
Vs. CASE NO. 00-01060
PET MED EXPRESS,
Respondent.
/
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT
COMES NOW the Petitioner, Department of Health, and files this Administrative
Complaint before the Board of Pharmacy against the Respondent, PET MED EXPRESS
and in support thereof would state:
1, Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of Pharmacy
pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 455, Florida Statutes; and Chapter
465, Florida Statutes.
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
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 orders of suspension or restriction.
3. Respondent has been at all times pertinent hereto, a duly licensed pharmacy
pursuant to Chapter 465, Florida Statutes, having been issued license number PH
0014144.
4. Respondent's last known address is 1441 S.W. 29" Avenue, Pompano Beach,
Florida 33069.
5. On or about March 3, 2000 an irivestigation was performed by agents of the
Petitioner. As a result, it was discovered that on November 6, 1999 the Respondent
dispensed Revolution to T.P. for her pet without a prescription.
6. In addition on March 3, 2000 the investigator requested copies of the
daily printout for prescriptions filled and began making telephone calls regarding the
verification of prescriptions. Four of the six persons contacted denied ever providing
authorization to Pet Med Express, or ever having received the call. Another individual
stated the person who supposedly verified the prescription was not working on the day of
the verification.
7. On March 8, 2000 printouts of verified prescriptions were obtained and
checked by the investigator, there were three instances that there were no calls made to
the veterinarians for verification of a prescription.
8. The conduct of the Respondent as aforesaid is contrary to the provisions
contained in Section 465.023(1)(c), Florida Statutes, and Rule 465.01 5(2)(c), Florida
Statutes, by dispensing medication without a valid prescription.
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.
QW we)
SIGNED thi YC day of j LU Yio 2000.
Robert G. Brooks, M.D.
Secretary, Department of Health
By: Nancy M. Snurkowski
Chief Attorney
On Behalf of the Agency for
Health Care Administration
COUNSEL FOR AGENCY:
Lawrence F. Kranert, Jr}
Senior Attorney sea STMGNT OF HEALTF
Florida Bar No. 0171063 - 2 Y CLERK
Agency for Health Care Administration CLERK Ychi R. Kean
General Counsel's Office - MQA
Practitioner Regulation
P.O. Box 14229
Tallahassee, Florida 32317-4229
(850) 487-2225 -
07/25/00 : ,
LFK/rt .
PCP:
DATE 7 |a00
Docket for Case No: 00-004315