Hand, 89 A.D.2d at 651, 453 N.Y.S.2d 121 (reversing order granting summary judgment to the pharmacist on the basis, inter alia, that a dispensing druggist may have a duty to warn a customer that a prescribed drug is contraindicated and to inquire of the prescribing doctor if such drug should not be discontinued). Moreover, at least one court has held that a pharmacist is not negligent unless he knowingly dispenses a drug that is inferior or defective. See, Ullman v. Grant, 114 Misc.2d 220, 221, 450 N.Y.S.2d 955 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.1982). In addition, New York courts have also found liability or culpable conduct on the part of a pharmacy where there was some active negligence on the part of the pharmacist. See Drennon v. Faris Pharmacy, Inc., 197 A.D.2d 863, 602 N.Y.S.2d 473 (4th Dept., 1993)(<HOLDING>); In re 882 East 180th Street Drug Corp. v. New
holding that the plaintiff established a meritorious claim of negligence on the part of the pharmacist in switching the labels on two medications holding that the burden is on the plaintiff holding violation of the rules of professional conduct does not create a legal duty on the part of the lawyer nor constitute negligence per se although it may be used as some evidence of negligence holding negligence on the part of the attorney does not qualify for such relief holding that to establish tort liability in a negligence action there must be a legal duty on the part of the defendant to plaintiff