Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 333 / Act 368 of 1978
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.17768 (2026)

Grounds for fine, reprimand, or probation, or for denying, limiting, suspending, or revoking license or ordering restitution or community service; applicability of subsection (2)(b).

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

PUBLIC HEALTH CODE


Act 368 of 1978


333.17768 Grounds for fine, reprimand, or probation, or for denying, limiting, suspending, or revoking license or ordering restitution or community service; applicability of subsection (2)(b).

Sec. 17768.

    (1) In a manner consistent with part 161, the disciplinary subcommittee may fine, reprimand, or place on probation a person licensed under this part, may deny, limit, suspend, or revoke a person's license, or may order restitution or community service for a violation of this part or rules promulgated under this part.

    (2) In addition to the grounds set forth in subsection (1), and in a manner consistent with part 161, the board may fine, reprimand, or place on probation a person licensed under this part, may deny, limit, suspend, or revoke a license issued under this part, or may order restitution or community service if the board finds that any of the following apply to an applicant; a partner, officer, or member of the board of directors of a pharmacy, manufacturer, wholesale distributor, or wholesale distributor-broker licensed under this part; a stockholder of a pharmacy, manufacturer, wholesale distributor, or wholesale distributor-broker that is a privately held corporation licensed under this part; or a facility manager for a manufacturer, wholesale distributor, or wholesale distributor-broker designated under section 17748(2):

    (a) The applicant or other person described in this subsection lacks good moral character.

    (b) Subject to subsection (3), the applicant or other person described in this subsection has been convicted of a misdemeanor or a felony under a state or federal law relating to a controlled substance or the practice of pharmacy.

    (c) The applicant or other person described in this subsection has furnished false or fraudulent material information or has knowingly omitted material information in an application filed under this part.

    (d) The applicant or other person described in this subsection has maintained a financial interest in a pharmacy, manufacturer, wholesale distributor, or wholesale distributor-broker that has been denied a license or federal registration, has had its license or federal registration limited, suspended, or revoked, or has been subject to any other criminal, civil, or administrative penalty.

    (e) The applicant or other person described in this subsection is not in compliance with article 7 or article 8 or the rules promulgated under article 7 or article 8.

    (f) The applicant or other person described in this subsection has violated section 17748.

    (3) Except for a conviction for a misdemeanor under section 7404(2)(d) or a local ordinance that is substantially similar to section 7404(2)(d), the reference to a misdemeanor in subsection (2)(b) applies only to a conviction for a misdemeanor that is directly related to the manufacture, delivery, possession, possession with intent to manufacture or deliver, use, distribution, prescription, or dispensing of a controlled substance. Subsection (2)(b) does not apply to a conviction for a misdemeanor based on an unintentional error or omission involving a clerical or record-keeping function.

    

History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978 ;-- Am. 1987, Act 250, Imd. Eff. Dec. 28, 1987 ;-- Am. 1993, Act 79, Eff. Apr. 1, 1994 ;-- Am. 2013, Act 268, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 2013 ;-- Am. 2014, Act 413, Eff. Mar. 30, 2015 ;-- Am. 2020, Act 4, Eff. Apr. 26, 2020 ;-- Am. 2020, Act 142, Imd. Eff. July 14, 2020

PopularName Notes:

Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1995–2019 · leading case: Orzel v. Scott Drug Co., 537 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Orzel v. Scott Drug Co., 537 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 1995). · cites it 3× “15(17763) and MCL 333.17768(1); MSA 14.15(17768)(1) 26 expand the types of penalties that health professional disciplinary subcommittees can *574 impose on licensed health care professionals who violate certain provisions of the health code, including allowing a subcommittee to…”
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “In 2014, petitioner filed an administrative complaint against respondent alleging that under MCL 333.17768(2)(d) it had the authority to impose sanctions on respondent for having its license limited and being subject to administrative penalties by the CBP in 2007, 2009, and 2013.”
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “In 2014, petitioner filed an administrative complaint against respondent alleging that under MCL 333.17768(2)(d) it had the authority to impose sanctions on respondent for having its license limited and being subject to administrative penalties by the CBP in 2007, 2009, and 2013.”
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “MCL 333.17768(2)(d) provides: [I]n a manner consistent with part 161 [MCL333.”
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “MCL 333.17768(2)(d) provides: [I]n a manner consistent with part 161 [MCL333.”
in Re Vernon Eugene Proctor Md (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). “See MCL 333.17768(1) and (2). MCL 333.16232 provides, “A disciplinary subcommittee shall meet within 60 days after the receipt of the recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law from a hearings examiner to impose a penalty.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.17768(1) — 2 cases
Orzel v. Scott Drug Co., 537 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 1995). “15(17763) and MCL 333.17768(1); MSA 14.15(17768)(1) 26 expand the types of penalties that health professional disciplinary subcommittees can *574 impose on licensed health care professionals who violate certain provisions of the health code, including allowing a subcommittee to…”
in Re Vernon Eugene Proctor Md (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). “See MCL 333.17768(1) and (2). MCL 333.16232 provides, “A disciplinary subcommittee shall meet within 60 days after the receipt of the recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law from a hearings examiner to impose a penalty.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.17768(2)(d) — 4 cases
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “In 2014, petitioner filed an administrative complaint against respondent alleging that under MCL 333.17768(2)(d) it had the authority to impose sanctions on respondent for having its license limited and being subject to administrative penalties by the CBP in 2007, 2009, and 2013.”
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “In 2014, petitioner filed an administrative complaint against respondent alleging that under MCL 333.17768(2)(d) it had the authority to impose sanctions on respondent for having its license limited and being subject to administrative penalties by the CBP in 2007, 2009, and 2013.”
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “MCL 333.17768(2)(d) provides: [I]n a manner consistent with part 161 [MCL333.”
in Re Coll. Pharmacy (Mich. Ct. App. 2017). “MCL 333.17768(2)(d) provides: [I]n a manner consistent with part 161 [MCL333.”
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.