Login | April 24, 2024
9th District affirms ruling permanently revoking pharmacist’s license
TRACEY BLAIR
Legal News Reporter
Published: November 30, 2021
A former pharmacist who was fired from a medical marijuana dispensary for allegedly giving co-workers homemade marijuana gummy bears argued his professional licenses should not have been permanently revoked.
Christopher Jaroscak worked as a pharmacist for over 10 years. Four months after starting work at the dispensary, a woman claimed he had given her a jar of homemade marijuana. After he was terminated, several more employees alleged Jaroscak had either given or sold them homemade marijuana products.
Jaroscak argued the Ohio Board of Pharmacy’s decision to permanently revoke his license was too harsh.
During an interview with a Board of Pharmacy agent, Jaroscak admitted providing the first employee with marijuana gummy bears. He also voluntarily surrendered a vaporizer cartridge containing THC. After more employees implicated him, Jaroscak voluntarily surrendered manufacturing items to the agent – including humidifier packs used to prevent product from drying out, mason jars bearing the names of various marijuana strands, packing material, black unmarked cylinders, silicone tray gummy bear molds, scales, sealed packages of gummy bears Jaroscak had manufactured, and capsules containing THC oil.
In July 2019, Jaroscak received notice from the Board that his pharmacist license and dispensary employee license were being suspended. The notice alleged he had manufactured THC products at home and had given or sold them to four people at the dispensary. In response to the notice,
Jaroscak requested and received a hearing before the Board.
Though he testified at the hearing, Jaroscak invoked his right against self-incrimination in response to any specific questions that might expose him to criminal liability. He acknowledged becoming dependent on marijuana and asked the Board to impose a sanction that would allow him to continue to seek treatment and eventually return to work as a pharmacist. The Board declined his request.
Jaroscak appealed the Board’s decision to the Lorain County trial court, which found the Board’s determination of misconduct was supported by the record. Though it disapproved of the severity of the sanction the Board imposed, the trial court found that it was without authority to modify that sanction.
Jaroscak then appealed the Lorain County court’s ruling, arguing the trial court abused its discretion by finding the Board’s order was supported by reliable, probative and substantial evidence.
The 9th District Court of Appeals rejected his arguments.
“The agent for the Board testified that he spoke to the employees at the dispensary and that each of the individuals with whom he spoke admitted that they had received marijuana products from Mr. Jaroscak,” Judge Teodosio wrote. “He also spoke with Mr. Jaroscak at his home and testified that Mr. Jaroscak was forthcoming about the fact that he had used THC oil to manufacture gummy bears and capsules containing THC oil and that he had given his homemade products to at least one of his coworkers at the dispensary. Upon request, Mr. Jaroscak produced for the agent a wealth of paraphernalia that he kept at his home and used during the manufacturing process. Many of those items were submitted to BCI for testing and also tested positive for the presence of THC. Accordingly, there was substantial evidence before the Board that Mr. Jaroscak was manufacturing illegal THC products and providing them to other employees at the dispensary.”
The appellate panel also rejected Jaroscak’s argument that the trial court improperly relied on case law from 1959 - Henry’s Café, Inc. v. Board of Liquor Control. In Henry’s Café, Inc., the Ohio Supreme Court held a common pleas court may reverse, vacate, or modify the order of an administrative agency only if it finds the order is not supported by reliable probative, and substantial evidence.
Jaroscak said a permanent revocation of his pharmaceutical license is too severe a penalty due to his impeccable work history, the circumstances under which he became addicted to marijuana, and his willingness to seek treatment.
“This court previously has considered arguments like the one Mr. Jaroscak has raised on appeal,” Judge Teodosio stated. “As we noted in those cases, we lack authority to modify or decline to follow precedent established by the Ohio Supreme Court.”
Appellate judges Jennifer Hensal and Donna J. Carr concurred. The case is cited Jaroscak v. State Bd. of Pharmacy, 2021-Ohio-3867.