The Utah Supreme Court convened on March 15, 2024, to hear oral arguments in the case of Walgreen v. Jensen, a significant matter concerning prescription errors and pharmacist liability. The case centers around the tragic death of Stephen Jensen, who died after being prescribed a dosage of medication that was four times the FDA-recommended amount.

During the proceedings, the attorney representing Jensen's family argued that the prescribing physician had intended to prescribe 1 milligram of medication, and that there was a clear discussion of alternatives with Jensen and his wife. The attorney questioned the causation of the error, suggesting that had the pharmacist contacted the physician, the correct dosage would have been confirmed. The argument emphasized that there is no law mandating pharmacists to consult with physicians in such cases.

The discussion also touched on the implications of filling prescriptions as written, with the attorney positing that if a prescription were to state an obviously incorrect dosage, such as 1000 milligrams instead of 1 milligram, it would not absolve the pharmacist from negligence. The attorney maintained that in this case, there was no evidence presented that the prescribed dosage was unusual or erroneous, as 1 milligram is a common dosage.

In contrast, the attorney for Walgreens highlighted a critical incident where a warning screen alerted a pharmacist to a potentially deadly interaction with another medication. Despite this warning, the pharmacist proceeded with the sale, which ultimately led to Jensen's death. The defense argued that Walgreens should not be held liable for the actions of its pharmacist in this instance, suggesting that the company should not be required to take additional steps beyond filling prescriptions as written.

The court's deliberations focused on the balance between pharmacist responsibility and the legal protections afforded to them when filling prescriptions. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for pharmacy practices and the standards of care expected from pharmacists in Utah.

As the court continues to review the arguments presented, the case remains a poignant reminder of the critical role pharmacists play in patient safety and the potential consequences of prescription errors. The justices are expected to issue a ruling that will clarify the extent of pharmacist liability in similar cases moving forward.