A College of Osteopathic Medicine alumnus is suing Ohio University after breaking an agreement requiring nonresidents to practice in state for five years.
Bruce Roth, the plaintiff, is challenging an Ohio law that forces nonresidents in the College of Osteopathic Medicine to indicate their intention to practice in Ohio. The college charged Roth $58,000 for reneging.
Although the law does not mention any penalties, nonresidents sign a separate agreement upon admission, which requires graduates who renege to pay back half of the state subsidy per student for each year at OU, said Jack Brose, dean of the College of Osteopathic Medicine. The state subsidy is currently $27,000 per student a year.
The purpose of the agreement is to encourage doctors to practice in Ohio, Brose said, adding that 62 percent of its graduates stay in Ohio.
OU is the only osteopathic medical institute in the U.S. with an out-of-state agreement and has received about $4 million from 107 students who have reneged since 1975, Brose said. The college does not include these earnings in yearly budgets.
Because Roth, an anesthesiologist, established residency in California while attending the University of California, Irvine, the Ohio native was considered an out-of-state resident upon enrolling.
Roth said following graduation in 1997, he intended to stay in Ohio, where he worked as a medical resident at Cleveland Clinic. But in September 2005, Roth began paying OU $682 a month plus 8 percent interest after getting married and moving to Arizona.
Daniel M. Roth, the attorney and father of the plaintiff, contends that the agreement violates the U.S. constitution's commerce clause by preventing graduates from practicing in other states. The commerce clause blocks states from regulating interstate commerce.
In addition, the law does not allow for a penalty, he said, citing a bankruptcy case against OU.
When College of Osteopathic Medicine alumna Stephanie Hawkins filed for bankruptcy in 2002, she owed OU $159,708, which accounted for 97 percent of her potentially dischargeable debt.
The bankruptcy court discharged the debt after ruling that the fee did not constitute an educational loan or benefit.
OU appealed the court's decision and lost when the appellate court held that the contract was unenforceable, according to court documents.
We don't think the bankruptcy case is relevant (to Roth's case)
said John Biancamano, director of OU Legal Affairs. Although the court dissolved Hawkins' debt, students not filing bankruptcy are still bound by the contractual agreement, he said.
1
News
Caitlin Bowling
