Chiaka v. Rawles

• Decision Date: 15 November 1999
• Docket Number: No. A99A1315.,A99A1315.
• Citation: 525 S.E.2d 162,240 Ga. App. 792
• Parties: CHIAKA v. RAWLES et al.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

525 S.E.2d 162

240 Ga. App. 792

CHIAKA v.RAWLES et al.

No. A99A1315.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

November 15, 1999.

Cyprian T. Okonkwo, for appellant.

Lance P. Dunnings, Michael A. Baskin, for appellees.

SMITH, Judge.

A disgruntled former graduate student, Bennett O. Chiaka, instituted litigation against Clark Atlanta University ("Clark Atlanta") and two of its officials, Clifton B. Rawles and Larry L. Earvin.Claiming that Clark Atlanta had misled him into believing that it offered a doctoral degree in African and African-American studies within its College of Arts and Sciences, Chiaka sought to recover damages for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, fraud, negligence, as well as punitive damages.The trial court granted a defense motion for summary judgment against all of Chiaka's claims, and Chiaka filed this appeal.Because Clark Atlanta successfully pierced the pleadings, we affirm.OCGA § 9-11-56(c);Lau's Corp. v. Haskins,261 Ga. 491, 405 S.E.2d 474(1991).

On summary judgment, we must construe the evidence and all reasonable inferences and conclusions in favor of the non-movant, Chiaka.Medley v. Boomershine Pontiac &c.,214 Ga.App. 795, 798(4), 449 S.E.2d 128(1994).Viewed in that light, the evidence shows that in early 1994, Chiaka applied for admission at Clark Atlanta seeking to obtain a degree in "Afro-American Studies."In a May 3, 1994 letter, Clifton B. Rawles, the Director of Admissions at Clark Atlanta, advised him: "[i]t is my pleasure to inform you that the Committee on Graduate Admissions has approved your application to our graduate program.You have been admitted to the Doctor of Arts degree program in African and African American Studies, commencing in the Fall semester, 1994."

For personal reasons, Chiaka sought to defer his acceptance for more than two years.Due to this delay, Clark Atlanta required that he reapply for admission.During the interim, almost a year before Chiaka finally enrolled, Rawles notified him that:

Dr. Charles Duncan, Chair of the Humanities Department, has requested that you be advised that you will be required to successfully complete twelve semester hours of prerequisite graduate courses in African and African American Studies.You may contact Dr. Duncan at [phone number] if you have any questions.

When Clark Atlanta reaccepted Chiaka, it did so provisionally.In the acceptance letter of November 25, 1996, Dean Larry L. Earvin notified Chiaka that "our Committee on Graduate Admissions has provided a conditional approval for you to pursue the Doctor of Arts program in African and African American Studies commencing the Spring Semester, 1997."¹

Although Chiaka finally enrolled at Clark Atlanta in January 1997, he dropped out several weeks later.According to Chiaka, only after enrolling and attending classes did he discover that Clark Atlanta did not offer a doctoral degree in African and African-American studies within its College of Arts and Sciences.Instead, he learned that Clark Atlanta offered only a Doctor of Arts in Humanities with a specialty in African-American studies.In suing Clark Atlanta, Chiaka asserted, among other things, that Clark Atlanta induced him to matriculate at Clark Atlanta by failing to disclose that it lacked the program of study that he desired to pursue.Chiaka claimed that he left his employment in Philadelphia, declined admission to two other doctoral programs in other cities, incurred student loan indebtedness, and relocated to Atlanta, only to discover that Clark Atlanta did not offer the program to which he had been admitted.

In support of Clark Atlanta's motion for summary judgment, Dr. Charles Duncan, Director of the Doctor of Arts in Humanities Program since 1991, attested that the Doctor of Arts in Humanities Program at Clark Atlanta is an interdisciplinary degree specializing in one of four areas: African-American studies, English, history, and romance languages.Dr. Duncan testified that "[u]pon completion of the degree requirements, a student receives a Doctor of Arts in Humanities degree with his/her particular specialty area noted.The doctoral level African American Studies program is and always has been a component of the Doctor of Arts in Humanities Program."Clark Atlanta also tendered copies of its application package and other school documents.

In granting summary judgment to the defendants on Chiaka's breach of contract claim, the trial court found that no contract was formed between the parties because there was no meeting of the minds.The court concluded that Clark Atlanta's offer of admission was simply a notification of acceptance and not a legal and enforceable contract.The court also noted, "the evidence of record demonstrates that Plaintiff knew or should have known that he applied to the Doctor of Arts in Humanities Program to pursue the Doctor of Arts in Humanities degree with a specialty in African American Studies."

In granting summary judgment on the fraud count, the court found:

Plaintiff has failed to provide any evidence to show that any representations made by defendants were made with the intention and purpose of deceiving him.Further, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that he reasonably relied on the alleged misrepresentations.The Court concludes that plaintiff's failure to review the University's Graduate Catalog, the Program Brochure or to otherwise obtain specific program information (as the application booklet instructs applicants to do) is fatal.

Employing the same logic, the court also granted summary judgment on Chiaka's claim for negligent misrepresentation.

1.Chiaka contends the trial court erred in finding there was no meeting of minds between him and Clark Atlanta with regard to his breach of contract claim.He asserts that Clark Atlanta breached an enforceable contract requiring that Clark Atlanta afford him the opportunity to obtain a Doctor of Arts degree in African and African-American studies.Clark Atlanta, however, counters that there was "no meeting of minds" as to this degree program and that, instead, "[p]laintiff entered into a valid contract with Clark Atlanta to pursue the Doctor of Arts degree in Humanities with a specialization in African American Studies."

Without reaching the issue of what doctoral degree would have been denoted on some future diploma, the record demonstrates indisputably that Chiaka did not satisfy a mandatory pre-enrollment condition.Chiaka's acceptance at Clark Atlanta in the doctoral program was conditioned upon his successful completion of 12 semester hours in certain specified courses at Clark Atlanta.But Chiaka withdrew from the university before complying with this mandatory condition.Since Chiaka failed to satisfy this prerequisite, he never obtained regular admission status and cannot enforce a purported agreement to provide a particular degree to him.SeeBlaine v. Savannah Country Day School,228 Ga.App. 224, 226-227, 491 S.E.2d 446(1997)(by violating school honor code, student, not school, breached contract);Life Chiropractic College v. Fuchs,176 Ga.App. 606, 607-608(1), 337 S.E.2d 45(1985)(college entitled to summary judgment on breach of contract claim due to student's misconduct in violating standards).See alsoBurke v. Emory Univ.,177 Ga.App. 30, 32, 338 S.E.2d 500(1985)(judicial intervention in the academic process is to be generally avoided).

2.Chiaka asserts that the trial court erred in finding the requisite elements of fraud were lacking.He contends that Clark Atlanta admitted him into a program that it knew was not available and it did so intending to defraud him.

The elements essential to an action in tort for fraud are: (1) false representations made by the defendant, (2) which the defendant knew were false, (3) made with an intent to deceive ...