Cal. BPC § 4306.6
This is the official text of Cal. BPC § 4306.6, part of California’s Business and Professions Code — regulates business practices and professional/occupational licensing - contractors, doctors, cosmetologists, real estate agents, and dozens of other licensed professions.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
Official statutory text
If the board disciplines a pharmacist-in-charge for the violation of a state or federal law or regulation committed by another person and the pharmacist-in-charge reported to the board that violation or suspected violation, the board shall use the report as a mitigating factor if all of the following conditions are met:
(a) The pharmacist-in-charge did not engage, either directly or indirectly, in any conduct that violated any state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy.
(b) The pharmacist-in-charge did not permit, encourage, approve of, either tacitly or implicitly or through willful ignorance, any conduct committed by another person that violated state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy.
(c) The pharmacist-in-charge reported the violation, or suspected violation, of any state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy to the board as soon as reasonably possible following the discovery of the violation.
(d) The pharmacist-in-charge took all actions reasonably necessary to stop and remedy the violation, or suspected violation, of any state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy as soon as reasonably possible following the discovery of the violation.
(a) The pharmacist-in-charge did not engage, either directly or indirectly, in any conduct that violated any state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy.
(b) The pharmacist-in-charge did not permit, encourage, approve of, either tacitly or implicitly or through willful ignorance, any conduct committed by another person that violated state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy.
(c) The pharmacist-in-charge reported the violation, or suspected violation, of any state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy to the board as soon as reasonably possible following the discovery of the violation.
(d) The pharmacist-in-charge took all actions reasonably necessary to stop and remedy the violation, or suspected violation, of any state or federal law or regulation pertaining to the practice of pharmacy as soon as reasonably possible following the discovery of the violation.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Need a lawyer in California?
Find a California lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.