Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1928 (2026)

Hearings; restraining order; judicial review

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, a license shall be denied, revoked or suspended or a pharmacist or pharmacy intern shall be placed on probation or censured and a civil penalty imposed only after due notice and a hearing pursuant to title 41, chapter 6, article 10. A licensee shall respond in writing to the board when the licensee receives notice of the hearing.

B. If the board has reasonable grounds to believe and finds that the licensee has been guilty of deliberate and wilful violations, or that the public health, safety and welfare imperatively require immediate action, and incorporates a finding to that effect in its order, the board may order a summary suspension of the license pending a hearing. If the board issues an order of summary suspension, it shall serve the licensee with written notice of the complaint and hearing setting forth the charges and informing the licensee of the licensee's right to the hearing. The board shall institute the hearing within ten days after ordering the summary suspension. Service shall be by personal service as provided by the Arizona rules of civil procedure.

C. Except as provided in section 41-1092.08, subsection H, final decisions of the board are subject to judicial review pursuant to title 12, chapter 7, article 6.

D. With or without conditions, the board may reinstate the license of any pharmacist or pharmacy intern that it has placed on probation or whose license it has suspended or revoked.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1976–1979 · leading case: Sarwark v. Thorneycroft, 596 P.2d 1173 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sarwark v. Thorneycroft, 596 P.2d 1173 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “§ 32-2391; Pharmacists, A.R.S. § 32-1928(0); Funeral Directors, A.”

Fumusa v. Arizona State Bd. of Pharmacy, 545 P.2d 432 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 5× “2d 22 (1971), the Pharmacy Board urges that since no provision is made in the section of the Pharmacy Act, A.R.S. § 32-1928(C), for appeal to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, but that there is provision for appeal to the Superior Court from decisions of the Pharmacy Board,…”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1928(0) — 1 case

Sarwark v. Thorneycroft, 596 P.2d 1173 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). “§ 32-2391; Pharmacists, A.R.S. § 32-1928(0); Funeral Directors, A.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1928(C) — 1 case

Fumusa v. Arizona State Bd. of Pharmacy, 545 P.2d 432 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1976). “2d 22 (1971), the Pharmacy Board urges that since no provision is made in the section of the Pharmacy Act, A.R.S. § 32-1928(C), for appeal to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, but that there is provision for appeal to the Superior Court from decisions of the Pharmacy Board,…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.