“As an attorney that specializes in animal law I am frequently contacted by citizens that are being harassed and intimidated
by homeowners associations or condo boards-even though their animal is not bothering anyone and has been prescribed by
their health care provider. In fact the intimidation by the condo boards aggravates the very condition the animal is intended
to alleviate. Of course the associations and boards have far more resources to fight these petty battles, and are often successful in forcing someone to move or give up an animal that is their life line because the pet owner has neither the money or emotional stamina to fight the associationA’s lawyers.”
— Marcy I LaHart, Esq., , legal advisor for Citizens for Pets in Condos.”
Thanks for your replys but we are really large and I have 52 locations accross the US. Here at Corporate we have 700 employees. We use Quest and their MRO is quite strict. Sometimes I can get the clinics to tell me stuff on the side but I have clinics all over the place, some out in corn field. In many states the life styles are so different it is very hard to control. I have many employees in the on customer sites as we are in the oil industry also. Those employees are subject to the customers tests so they are ok. It is the shop to shop employees I am concerned about. I can not be in all the states at once and can only act when the location managers tell me things. I am sure some hold out until i have an injury
Cottam v. CVS Pharmacy , 436 Mass. 316 (2002)
Court described the "learned intermediary doctrine" wherein a physician acts as a "learned intermediary" between the drug manufacturer or distributor and the consuming patient. As a result, a pharmacy has the duty only to fill the prescription correctly. Only a physician, not a pharmacy or a drug manufacturer, has a duty to warn a customer about a drug's side effects. A pharmacy which voluntarily assumes the duty to warn, however, such as by providing a list of a drug's side effects, must exercise reasonable care. In addition, a pharmacy may have a duty to warn if it has specific knowledge of increased danger to a particular customer, such as filling 2 prescriptions which adversely interact with each other. See, for example, Brienze v. Casserly, 17 . 214 (2003): Court held that the CVS pharmacist had a duty to warn the plaintiff that taking Ciproflaxin and Theophylline together could potentially result in adverse effects.