Surgeons file suit

SANDUSKY — Three longtime Sandusky-area surgeons, who say they are the only general surgeons working in the city, are seeking to break away from Northern Ohio Medical Specialists, also known as NOMS Healthcare, according to a recently filed lawsuit. Drs. Fredric Itzkowitz, Paul Laffay and Albert Vargas filed suit against NOMS in early February, seeking to prevent the organization from enforcing clauses in the contract each signed. A non-compete clause, which was present in each of their contracts with NOMS, would prevent them from offering services for two years in a 25-mile radius. That radius would mean they would not be able to practice in any of Erie County. The area would extend west to Lindsey, south to Willard, east to Lorain and north to the Canadian border. The suit calls the non-compete clauses "unreasonable and unenforceable." What happened, what's claimed In mid-January, all three doctors issued letters of resignation to NOMS. "Please accept this correspondence as my 90-day advanced written notice of the termination of my employment with NOMS," the letters state. The suit states that the doctors intend to join Firelands Physician Group as they have become unsatisfied with NOMS' compensation model. They believe the model is also preventing NOMS from attracting new general surgeons to replace the current doctors in the future. After receiving the resignation letters, NOMS sent a letter to each doctor, threatening to sue them to prevent them from joining Firelands Physician Group, citing the non-compete clauses each agreed to. The doctors claim NOMS has not enforced the non-compete clause against several other doctors who left the organization in the last ten years. They say they have long been associated with Firelands and have privileges at the hospital. The doctors also lease space from the hospital on Tyler Street in Sandusky. As they are the only general surgeons operating in Sandusky, they claim that preventing them from practicing would do irreparable harm to both them and patients in the area. The doctors are seeking an injunction preventing NOMS from enforcing the non-compete clause, a monetary award in excess of $25,000, attorneys' fees and any other relief the court deems appropriate. NOMS response NOMS filed a legal brief in opposition to the suit, stating that it has "a legitimate business interest in enforcing the non-competition agreement voluntarily entered into by plaintiffs herein. It claims that failure to enforce the non-compete clause will harm patients in the form of higher medical bills, and said that their business would suffer "irreperable harm." NOMS' attorney asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit and also filed a counterclaim against the surgeons, asking the court to find them in breach of contract and pay damages as deemed proper by the court.