Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1980 [PAGE 433]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

422

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

[September 20

National Board Examination. It is alleged that under University actions a senior medical student who fails to pass the senior certifying examination may be continued as a medical student and placed in an individually structured senior remedial program to assist the student in preparation for a subsequent senior certifying examination. I t is stated that Plaintiff Craft was a senior student in remediation from June 1, 1977, to May 17, 1978, when he was terminated as a medical student, and that Plaintiff DeSalle was a senior student in remediation from June 5, 1976, to December 12, 1977, when he was terminated as a medical student, the termination in both instances based on failure to pass the certifying examination. It is alleged that out of hostility to plaintiffs because of their race, certain University employees failed to perform their duties of providing plaintiffs the necessary remedial programs and services while falsely and intentionally representing to the appropriate University committees that they had done so, and that because of the plaintiff's race other University employees provided the committees with false statements, representations, and evaluations of plaintiffs' progress and performance, thereby resulting in the plaintiffs' dismissals as medical students. In addition to the money damages identified above, Count I seeks an injunction enjoining the University and its employees from acts which deprive plaintiffs and other black medical students of rights secured them by the constitution and laws of the United States, and asks the court to order the readmission of each plaintiff and the conferring upon him of the degree of Doctor of Medicine. Count II alleges that the University has a special admissions program, known as the "Fifth Pathway," governed by an Illinois statute under which the College of Medicine admits medical students who have completed a specified course of study in another country and who satisfy certain residency requirements. It is alleged that medical students admitted under the Fifth Pathway are permitted to bypass certifying requirements applicable to other students, including the senior certifying examination, and after satisfactorily completing ten months of supervised clinical training are awarded a certificate by the University which is alleged to be "the equivalent to the degree Doctor of Medicine" issued by the University. It is further alleged that the Illinois statute and the University's actions thereunder deny plaintiffs equal protection of the law and privileges and immunities in violation of the U.S. Constitution since Fifth Pathway students at the University are not required to pass the senior certifying examination in order to qualify to take the State Medical Licensing Examination. Count I I I alleges that the Fifth Pathway statute is unconstitutional in that it violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by arbitrarily setting u p a preferential class for bestowal of a license to practice medicine in this state a n d by denying others, including plaintiffs, equal protection. Count IV alleges that the University has received federal funds through the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare ( H E W ) and approved by the commissioner of education for the operation of the Minority Opportunity Program. It is alleged that the University intentionally permitted its employees to use such funds in nonminority programs and to deny black medical students, including plaintiffs, the services which it received these federal funds to provide thereby denying them equality of services and other benefits. It is asserted that the University and its employees were conspirators in a scheme to deny plaintiffs, because of their race, rights secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States. I t is further alleged that the Illinois director of the Department of Registration and Education, Patricia Roberts Harris in her official capacity as secretary of HEW, and Ernest L. Boyer in his official capacity as commissioner of education are coconspirators with the University and its employees in their scheme and conspiracy. I n addition to the injunctive and declaratory relief and the same money damages sought in Count I against the University and its employees, Count IV seeks injunctions against the secretary of H E W and the commissioner of education preventing payment of federal funds to the University for use in the Minority Oppor-