United States District Court, D. New Hampshire
Dr. Jeffrey Isaacs
Trustees of Dartmouth College, NH Board of Medicine, and Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center Opinion No. 2017 DNH 175
A. Chabot, Esq., Keith A. Mathews, Esq., William D. Pandolph,
Esq., John F. Skinner, III, Esq., Seth Michael Zoracki, Esq.
MCCAFFERTY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
claims that arise from a disciplinary action taken against
him by the New Hampshire Board of Medicine
(“Board”), Dr. Jeffrey Isaacs has sued the Board,
the Trustees of Dartmouth College (“Trustees”),
and Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
(“DHMC”). Before the court is plaintiff's motion
for preliminary injunctive relief. The Board objects. For the
reasons that follow, plaintiff's motion is denied.
attended the Keck School of Medicine (“Keck”) at
the University of Southern California (“USC”)
until “he was suspended and ultimately dismissed for
harassing a classmate.” Isaacs v.
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Med. Ctr., No. 12-CV-040-LM, 2014 WL
1572559, at *2 (D.N.H. Apr. 18, 2014). Isaacs then sued USC,
and his suit resulted in two settlement agreements, one with
USC's deans and one with U.S.C. itself.
he left USC, Isaacs attended the American University of the
Caribbean, Netherlands Antilles, which awarded him an M.D.
degree. Thereafter, he began a residency in general surgery
at the University of Arizona (“UA”), but he
resigned after approximately three weeks.
Dr. Isaacs applied for a residency at DHMC through the
Electronic Residency Application Service
(“ERAS”). “In [his ERAS] application, he
omitted both his attendance at U.S.C. and his aborted
residency at UA.” Id. Based upon his ERAS
application, Dr. Isaacs was accepted into the DHMC residency
program in psychiatry. Dr. Isaacs also completed an
application for, and ultimately obtained, a residency
training license from the Board. Dr. Isaacs began his DHMC
residency in June 2011. He was dismissed from the program in
DHMC dismissed Dr. Isaacs, it notified the Board of his
dismissal, and further informed the Board that Dr. Isaacs had
“allegedly omitted material facts from his [training
license] [a]pplication . . . and the supplement filed along
with the application.” Doc. no. 7-1 at 1. “As a
result of [that] information, the Board commenced an
investigation to determine whether [Dr. Isaacs had] committed
professional misconduct pursuant to RSA 329:17, VI and RSA
October 2013, the Board informed Dr. Isaacs that a hearing
had been scheduled for 1:00 p.m. on February 5, 2014,
“to determine whether in May 2011 [he had] engaged in
professional misconduct by submitting false information to
the Board and for failing to fully disclose all previous
medical schools attended.” Id. at 2. On
January 29, 2014, Dr. Isaacs notified the Board that he had
filed suit against it in Pennsylvania, and he asked the Board
to postpone his hearing. He also asked to appear at his
hearing telephonically, for medical reasons. The Board denied
both requests. On the morning of the day of his hearing, Dr.
Isaacs sent the Board an e-mail indicating that he would not
be attending, due to inclement weather that would make it
impossible for him to drive to New Hampshire from
Pennsylvania. The hearing went on as scheduled, without Dr.
Isaacs. “Attorney Jeff Cahill appeared as hearing
counsel.” Id. at 4.
month after the hearing, the Board issued a Final Decision
and Order, which was signed by Penny Taylor, in her capacity
as Administrator and Authorized Representative of the New
Hampshire Board of Medicine. Taylor described the evidence
before the Board as including: (1) the two e-mails in which
Dr. Isaacs had requested continuances of the hearing; (2) Dr.
Isaacs's application to the Board for a residency
training license; (3) an excerpt from a court order issued in
his case against USC; and (4) the confidential settlement
agreement that resulted from that suit. See Id. at
decision, the Board noted that DHMC's dismissal of Dr.
Isaacs resulted in the cancellation of his medical license as
a matter of law. But, it also went on to issue a reprimand,
based upon its findings that when Dr. Isaacs applied for his
license, he “knowingly made a false statement and
further failed to disclose a material fact.”
Id. at 8-9. According to the Board's decision,
the material fact that Dr. Isaacs failed to disclose was his
expulsion from Keck. See Id. at 2, 8. The
Board's decision is posted online somewhere in the public
domain. Since the Board reprimanded him, Dr. Isaacs has
applied to many residency programs, including the program at
DHMC, but he has not received a single interview.
action followed. In his original complaint, plaintiff
claimed, through the vehicle of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that
the Board had violated his constitutionally protected liberty
interest in practicing his chosen occupation by reprimanding
in his First Amended Complaint, doc. no. 40, plaintiff drops
the Board as a § 1983 defendant and, instead, asserts a
§ 1983 claim (Count I) against Cahill, Taylor, and the
individual members of the Board, who are unnamed, for
violating his rights to substantive and procedural due
process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution. Count I concludes with the following prayer for
relief: “WHEREFORE, Dr. Isaacs seeks monetary relief to
be made whole, or, the retraction, withdrawal, and
elimination from the public domain of the Board's
Order.” Id. at ¶ 66.
the Board, plaintiff brings: (1) a discrimination claim under
the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42
U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (Count III); (2) an ADA
retaliation claim (Count IV); and (3) a claim captioned
“Prospective Injunctive Relief Against the NH Board of
Medicine in its Official Capacity, ” doc. no. 40 at 19
(capitalization omitted), (Count V). Count V begins this way:
“The statutory and constitutional violations outlined
above have resulted in a deprivation of the plaintiff's
rights; and, the wrongful dissemination of false,
confidential, and detrimental information regarding the
plaintiff.” Id. at ¶ 93. Count V
concludes this way:
The plaintiff is seeking injunctive and declaratory relief
against the State, or the “office” of the NH
Board of Medicine to take down and/or retract the
Constitutionally infirm ...