Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94C, § 17 (2026)

Necessity of prescription for dispensing controlled substances

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 17. (a) No controlled substance in Schedule II may be dispensed without an electronic prescription from a practitioner, except that—

(b) In emergency situations, as defined by the commissioner, a schedule II, III, IV, V or VI substance may be dispensed upon written prescription or oral prescription in accordance with section 20 and related regulations.

(c) A controlled substance included in Schedule III, IV, V or VI shall not be dispensed without an electronic prescription from a practitioner.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1976–2020 · leading case: Kellogg v. Bd. of Reg. in Med., 958 N.E.2d 51 (Mass. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kellogg v. Bd. of Reg. in Med., 958 N.E.2d 51 (Mass. 2011). “See G. L. c. 94C, § 17. Further, although Kellogg maintained logs of the medication dispensed to his home clinic patients, the logs as produced to the board did not contain any information identifying the patients to whom Kellogg dispensed controlled substances.”

Commonwealth v. Walker, 812 N.E.2d 262 (Mass. 2004). “§ 353 (b)(1)(A) (2000); G. L. c. 94C, § 17 (c). As mentioned above, the Commonwealth’s experts testified at trial that temazepam is a “Class 4” substance (can only be dispensed with a prescription from a licensed physician) and of all pharmaceuticals, benzodiazepines generate…”

Commonwealth v. Brown, 925 N.E.2d 845 (Mass. 2010). “94C, § 39; physicians who do not follow the restrictions on oral and written prescriptions set out in G. L. c. 94C, §§ 17 and 25, may be punished under G.”

Commonwealth v. Frodyma, 471 N.E.2d 1298 (Mass. 1984). “G. L. c. 94C, § 17. He received a sentence of one year, which was suspended, and three years’ probation.”

Commonwealth v. Walker, 801 N.E.2d 267 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). “§ 353 (b)(1)(A) (1999); G. L. c. 94C, § 17(c). See generally G. L.”

Commonwealth v. Stirlacci (Mass. 2020). “94C, § 1 (defining oral and written prescriptions as orders to dispense medication by "practitioner"); G. L. c. 94C, § 17 (a)-(b) (no Schedule II controlled substance may be dispensed without prescription by "practitioner"); G.”

Kearney v. Bd. of Reg. in Pharmacy, 340 N.E.2d 515 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976). · cites it 2× “Each of the statutory provisions cited in the second through fifth charges (G. L. c. 94C, §§ 17 [a] and [c], 3 20 and 23 [d]) is concerned with the dispensing *27 of a “controlled substance” (as defined in G.”

— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94C, § 17(c) — 2 cases

Commonwealth v. Walker, 801 N.E.2d 267 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004). “§ 353 (b)(1)(A) (1999); G. L. c. 94C, § 17(c). See generally G. L.”

Kearney v. Bd. of Reg. in Pharmacy, 340 N.E.2d 515 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976). “Each of the statutory provisions cited in the second through fifth charges (G. L. c. 94C, §§ 17 [a] and [c], 3 20 and 23 [d]) is concerned with the dispensing *27 of a “controlled substance” (as defined in G.”

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.