ILNews

Student kicked out of IU medical school loses on breach of contract claim

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Ohio man who was in his third year at Indiana University School of Medicine when he was dismissed for allegedly cheating couldn’t convince the Indiana Court of Appeals to overturn summary judgment for the school on his breach of contract claim.

Three professors saw Peter F. Amaya repeatedly glance to his right during a mini-block examination in March 2010 and believed he was cheating. Amaya denied he cheated, claiming he was looking up at a clock on the wall. At a show cause hearing before the Student Promotions Committee, Amaya made a PowerPoint presentation and provided other materials to support his claim.

A field test conducted in the testing room concluded the professors could tell when a student was looking up at the clock or over at another student’s exam. In June 2010, the SPC recommended Amaya be dismissed for failure to maintain acceptable professional standards; the SPC declined to reverse its recommendation, and the school’s dean, D. Craig Brater, upheld the dismissal.

Amaya sued on several grounds, with his claims of breach of contract and breach of good faith and fair dealing the only issues before the Court of Appeals. The trial court granted summary judgment for the medical school on these claims in April 2012.

After finding the claim for breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing doesn’t apply to this case, the judges upheld summary judgment on the breach of contract claim in Peter F. Amaya v. D. Craig Brater, M.D., in his capacity as Dean and Director of Indiana University School of Medicine; The Board of Trustees of Indiana University; et al., 49A04-1204-PL-208.

“… even assuming that an implied contract existed between Amaya and IUSM, and even assuming that IUSM failed to strictly follow the procedures outlined in all its handbooks and codes or to publish its procedures in specific accordance with accreditation standards as asserted by Amaya, that does not automatically lead to a finding of breach of contract on the part of IUSM,” Judge Terry Crone wrote. “It is well settled that before a court will intervene into the implied contractual relationship between student and university, there must be some evidence that the university acted arbitrarily or in bad faith. Amaya has failed to designate any such evidence here.”

The medical school followed its published procedures for dismissal and there is no evidence designated that the school’s decision to dismiss Amaya was arbitrary, capricious or made in bad faith, the judges held.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Can I get this form on line,if not where can I obtain one. I am eligible.

  2. What a fine example of the best of the Hoosier tradition! How sad that the AP has to include partisan snark in the obit for this great American patriot and adventurer.

  3. Why are all these lawyers yakking to the media about pending matters? Trial by media? What the devil happened to not making extrajudicial statements? The system is falling apart.

  4. It is a sad story indeed as this couple has been only in survival mode, NOT found guilty with Ponzi, shaken down for 5 years and pursued by prosecution that has been ignited by a civil suit with very deep pockets wrenched in their bitterness...It has been said that many of us are breaking an average of 300 federal laws a day without even knowing it. Structuring laws, & civilForfeiture laws are among the scariest that need to be restructured or repealed . These laws were initially created for drug Lords and laundering money and now reach over that line. Here you have a couple that took out their own money, not drug money, not laundering. Yes...Many upset that they lost money...but how much did they make before it all fell apart? No one ask that question? A civil suit against Williams was awarded because he has no more money to fight...they pushed for a break in order...they took all his belongings...even underwear, shoes and clothes? who does that? What allows that? Maybe if you had the picture of him purchasing a jacket at the Goodwill just to go to court the next day...his enemy may be satisfied? But not likely...bitterness is a master. For happy ending lovers, you will be happy to know they have a faith that has changed their world and a solid love that many of us can only dream about. They will spend their time in federal jail for taking their money from their account, but at the end of the day they have loyal friends, a true love and a hope of a new life in time...and none of that can be bought or taken That is the real story.

  5. Could be his email did something especially heinous, really over the top like questioning Ind S.Ct. officials or accusing JLAP of being the political correctness police.

ADVERTISEMENT