Rayess v. Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates
134 Ohio St. 3d 509
Ohio2012Background
- Rayess, a foreign medical graduate, sued the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG) for breach of an express written contract related to taking the USMLE Part I.
- Rayess applied to take Part I; the ECFMG approved his 1993 exam, which he later failed.
- In 1998 and later, Rayess pursued related actions; in 2008 he filed the current breach claim alleging the pamphlet and related documents created contractual terms.
- The documents Rayess attached included an informational pamphlet describing the USMLE, testing-site confirmation, and payment receipts, but no single written contract.
- The trial court dismissed, ruling no express contract and that any unwritten contract would be barred by the six-year statute of limitations.
- The court of appeals reversed, treating the documents as a ‘promise in writing’ and applying a 15-year statute of limitations for written contracts; the Ohio Supreme Court reversed, holding no written contract exists.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do pamphlet and application form form a written contract? | Rayess argues the pamphlet plus attached documents create a contract. | ECFMG contends there is no express written contract from those materials. | No written contract formed. |
| What statute of limitations governs? | If a contract exists, 15-year period applies. | No contract means no 15-year period; only shorter applicable limit. | No contract => not subject to 15-year limit; judgment for defendant. |
| Do the documents create mutual obligations with definite terms? | Pamphlet and forms set forth terms for examination. | They do not contain definite, mutually agreed terms. | No definite mutual terms; not a contract. |
| Can an informational pamphlet be contractually binding? | Pamphlet implies examination terms. | Informational pamphlet alone is not binding. | Informational pamphlet is not a contract. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kostelnik v. Helper, 96 Ohio St.3d 1 (2002) (contract formation requires definite terms and meeting of the minds)
- Episcopal Retirement Homes, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Industrial Relations, 61 Ohio St.3d 366 (1991) (mutual assent and definite terms required for contract)
- Minster Farmers Coop. Exchange Co., Inc. v. Meyer, 117 Ohio St.3d 459 (2008) (nonbinding materials not a contract)
- Love v. Duke Univ., 776 F.Supp. 1070 (M.D.N.C. 1991) (policy materials not contracts)
- State ex rel. Midwest Pride IV, Inc. v. Pontious, 75 Ohio St.3d 565 (1996) ( Civ.R. 12(C) standard for motion for judgment on the pleadings)