Jung v. Association Of American Medical Colleges: the lawsuit challenging our system of graduate medical education
This article examines the antitrust case in which three physicians have challenged the Match Program and various other aspects of the system of graduate medical education in the United States. After describing the parties to the litigation, the author explains the plaintiffs’ theories of liability....
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of the American College of Radiology 2004, Vol.1 (1), p.40-47 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | This article examines the antitrust case in which three physicians have challenged the Match Program and various other aspects of the system of graduate medical education in the United States. After describing the parties to the litigation, the author explains the plaintiffs’ theories of liability. He suggests how the plaintiffs are likely to claim damages in the multibillion dollar range and speculates about the injunctive relief that the plaintiffs are likely to seek. The author then sets forth some of the principal defenses to the case, as well as the basis for the defendants’ position that the plaintiffs have not been injured at all. The author goes on to explore developments that have occurred since the lawsuit was filed on May 7, 2002. These include a motion by the National Residency Matching Program to refer the case to arbitration; motions by certain teaching hospital defendants asserting that they are not subject to suit in the District of Columbia; and motions by the American Medical Association, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, and other organization defendants to the effect that the plaintiffs have not alleged conduct by them that violates the antitrust laws. The author then discusses the motion by the plaintiffs to have the case certified as a class action. Finally, he considers legislative initiatives that the litigation has engendered. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1546-1440 1558-349X |
DOI: | 10.1016/S1546-1440(03)00007-3 |