United States v. Alan J. Citrin
Opinion
Opinion
Hug, J.
Alan Citrin appeals from a summary judgment in which the district court found the United States entitled to statutorily prescribed damages resulting from Citrin’s breach of a scholarship agreement with the United States. Citrin contends that he was excused from performing under the contract and that the damages were improperly calculated. We affirm.
The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1345 . We have appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Martin, 872 F.2d 319, 320 (9th Cir.1989).
We must decide whether Citrin is excused from serving as a doctor in an under-served area of the country because the Government repudiated the scholarship contract, the Government took away Cit-rin’s vested right to a deferment, or the Government violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553 . We also must determine whether the damages violate 42 U.S.C. § 2541 (1988), due process, or the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 , et seq. (1988).
I.
In 1976 Congress established the National Health Service Corps (“NHSC”) Scholarship Program (“the Program”) in order to address the…