Opinion ID: 1861952
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Grade in Medicine.

Text: Many witnesses testified on this subject but we will not devote much space to it. It appears that appellant apparently concedes that he failed the course because his brief states: We submit that he (appellant) had passed his courses with the possible exception of Medicine, but was entitled to repeat that course. Dr. Murdaugh, one of the instructors in Medicine, in discussing appellant with Dr. Meador, another instructor in Medicine, accused appellant of intellectual dishonesty which was defined by the instructor as a fabrication of information in medicine, this carries the connotation of patient neglect. It carries the connotation of great danger in medicine in the care of a sick person. Giving wrong information when asked a direct question. His inability to say I don't know was repeatedly exhibited. One notation by another instructor on his record called him a bluffer. Another instructor wrote that he Seems disorganized and tries to make up for it pure bull. These last three notations appear on appellant's exhibits, some of which contain laudatory statements concerning him and his work. It is interesting to note on the allegations of conspiracy that neither Dr. Frommeyer, Chairman of the Department of Medicine, nor Dr. Boshell, head of the third year in Medicine, had ever heard of the charge of intellectual dishonesty until the trial. Appellant was repeatedly warned about his poor performance but his grades in medicine continued to fall, and at the end of the winter quarter, it was proposed that appellant be given a special examination by Drs. Frommeyer and Boshell. They assigned appellant to a patient and he made several mistakes in the diagnosis, some of which were serious. Dr. Boshell signed a statement giving a record of their examination of appellant and stated: It is the opinion of Dr. Frommeyer and myself that this student does not know enough facts to pass third year medicine. In addition, he makes a very grave error of stating things very strongly as fact that are not true and does not seem to realize that such is the case. It is therefore our opinion that he should be failed in the third year medicine course. Appellant was notified on March 6, 1964, by letter, that he had failed the third year course in medicine and the next meeting of the Promotions Committee would decide whether he would be permitted to repeat the course in the summer of 1964. On May 11, 1964, appellant left a note with the registrar asking help to be allowed to repeat medicine at the University of California Medical School. Appellant's chief contention is that an average of certain grades he had received would show that he passed medicine. The testimony of Dr. Boshell is conclusive that these are tentative grades. Then, it was Dr. Boshell's duty to call a session to review the student's performance and then a grade was turned in to Dr. Frommeyer, the head of the Department, who turned in a final grade to the registrar. Both Dr. Boshell and Dr. Frommeyer gave appellant a failing grade, Dr. Boshell a 69 and Dr. Frommeyer a 60, and an F was turned in by Dr. Frommeyer as his grade on the course. An excerpt of the minutes of the March 5th meeting read: Frederick MustellThe Department of Medicine reported that this student failed his course in third year medicine during the Winter Quarter of 1963-64 which has just ended. This student will have to repeat third year medicine during the Summer of 1964. The evidence supports the awarding of a failure in medicine.