Vought v. Teachers College, Columbia University

• Decision Date: 09 February 1987
• Citation: 127 A.D.2d 654,511 N.Y.S.2d 880
• Parties: , 37 Ed. Law Rep. 642 Michael VOUGHT, Appellant, v. TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 880

511 N.Y.S.2d 880

127 A.D.2d 654, 37 Ed. Law Rep. 642

Michael VOUGHT, Appellant, v. TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division Second Department.

Feb. 9, 1987.

Leibowtiz & Peterson, Garden City (R. Bertil Peterson, of counsel), for appellant.

Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, New York City (John W. Dean, Eugene F. Farabaugh and Rolf S. Woolner, of counsel), for respondent.

Before THOMPSON, J.P., and BRACKEN, BROWN and EIBER, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, fraud and negligence, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), dated May 29, 1986, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment and denied his cross motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Based on an advertisement published by the defendant college, the plaintiff, an undergraduate student with 60 credits, became interested in the "Accel-A-Year" program offered by the defendant which would grant him a combined Bachelor of Science and Master of Arts degree after an additional two years of study, thereby saving him one year towards the latter degree. Thereupon, the plaintiff received an advisory statement from the defendant which referred to the prospective granting of a combined Bachelor of Science and Master of Arts degree solely in this manner: "Application is in process to Albany for approval of this program as a combined degree program of B.S. M.A." (emphasis supplied). The plaintiff checked off the box marked "Master of Arts Degree" on his application for admission, and the defendant's letter of acceptance referred to his admission to a program leading to a Master of Arts degree. Furthermore, oral statements made during an interview to the plaintiff by an agent of the defendant also indicated that the program would lead to a Master of Arts degree, but that the application for a combined degree program had been made but was not yet approved. After six months of study, the defendant notified the plaintiff that the application was not going to be approved in time for him to receive the combined degree, and, therefore, he should consider returning to his undergraduate studies. The plaintiff returned to his studies and the defendant granted him his Master of Arts degree in October 1982.

When a student is admitted to a university, an implied contract arises between the parties which states that if the student complies with the terms prescribed by the university, he will obtain the degree he seeks (see, Matter of Carr v. St. John's Univ., 17 A.D.2d 632, 231 N.Y.S.2d 410, affd. 12 N.Y.2d 802, 235 N.Y.S.2d 834, 187 N.E.2d 18). The rights and obligations of the parties as contained in the university's bulletins, circulars and regulations made available to the student, become a part of this contract (Prusack v. State of New York, 117 A.D.2d 729, 498 N.Y.S.2d 455). Because the documents made available to the plaintiff herein by the university...