ÿWPCè …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ 0JH 0T’ æ 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ U,- 0dY U,½ U>é U6'B)] B†DC£ AMæU*3"] D3v~²vÓ0 0@ AOCÆ’ 0DX D/œ B˘HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ”D•–D—˜D™š›DœÓ€ŽUv 3|x¨2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô>#2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d d$$$$7Border 1dd€-&Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€(ÔÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€(XÔÌÌò òMarch€27,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€(ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó%%%%'ÿÿdxdPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€!!X„d&ÓÑ#€!!Xd#ÑÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÑ P ÑÔ€#ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Ñ7€õYXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌDAVID€BROCK,€ANGEL€œBURRAGE›,€€€€€€)€C/A€NO.€œ03A01›„9509„CV„00297ÌœTRESA›€COOPER,€SHARON€œCRAWFORD›,€€€)€HAMILTON€COUNTY€CIRCUIT€COURTÌÙ€€ÙœßL€')&;+'h|` Å `€€Lß›KAREN€CLARK€œHICKMAN›,€CAROLYN€€€€€)ÌœHINES›,€œLAJUANA›€JONES,€€€€€€€€€€€€)ÌW.€RUTH€œOBEN›,€MARY€œOLDAKER›,€€€€€€)€ÌAND€MARTHA€SMITH,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ìà àà àPlaintiffs„Appellants,€)€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)€HONORABLEÏWILLIAM€L.€BROWN,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)ÌPROVIDENT€LIFE€AND€ACCIDENT€€€€€€)€à à€ÌINSURANCE€COMPANY,€PATTY€œCROCKER›,)ÌNAOMI€œSMITHERMAN›,€AND€DONNA€à à€€€)ÌœWILCOX›,à àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€)Ìà àà àDefendants„Appellees.€€)€AFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÌÌLYNN€PERRY,€Cleveland,€for€AppellantsÌÌCHRISTOPHER€H.€œSTEGER›€and€KAREN€M.€SMITH€of€MILLER€&€MARTIN,ÏChattanooga,€for€Appellees€€ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌÓ  Óà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àó󀀜Susano›,€J.ÇÓÓà àà àIn€the€joint€complaint€filed€in€this€action,€each€of€theÏten€plaintiffs€asserted€an€individual€cause€of€action€againstÏtheir€former€employer,€Provident€Life€and€Accident€InsuranceÏCompany€œ(Provident),›€and€three€of€the€companyððs€supervisors.€€œEachÏof€the›€œplaintiffs›€œrelied›€upon€similar€œfacts€in€charging›€thatÏProvident€had€breached€an€employment€contract,€had€breached€œits›Ïimplied€covenant€of€good€faith€and€fair€dealing,€and€had€beenÏguilty€of€the€tort€of€negligent€misrepresentation.€€The€individualÏdefendants€were€sued€for€actions€on€their€part€that€formed€œa€partÏof€the›€basis€for€the€suit€against€Provident.€€The€trial€courtÏgranted€Providentððs€motion€for€summary€judgment€as€to€each€claim.€ÏThe€plaintiffs€appeal,€raising€the€following€questions€as€takenÏfrom€their€joint€brief:ÌÌÓÓà àà8 à1.€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€holding€thatÏthere€was€no€genuine€issue€of€material€factÏregarding€whether€there€was€a€writtenÏemployment€contract€for€a€definite€term?ÌÌà8 àà8 à2.€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€holding€that€theÏcontract€was€not€a€writing€as€contemplated€byÏthe€Statute€of€Frauds,€œT.C.A.›€ðð€œ29„2„101(5)?ÌÌà àà8 à3.€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€holding€thatÏthere€was€no€cause€of€action€for€negligentÏmisrepresentation€under€the€facts€of€this€caseÏand€the€law€of€Tennessee?Ì›Ìà8 àà8 àœ4.›€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€holding€thatÏthere€is€no€cause€of€action€for€breach€of€anÍimplied€covenant€of€good€faith€and€fairÏdealing€under€the€facts€of€this€case€and€theÏlaw€of€Tennessee?ÌÌà8 àà8 àÌÌÌÓÓWe€œaffirm.ÌÌ›à@ àIÌÌà àà àIn€the€latter€part€of€1992,€Provident€assigned€theÏplaintiffs€to€work€in€various€positions€in€what€was€referred€to€asÏthe€companyððs€Medicare€Litigation€Unit€(Unit).€€ProvidentÏestablished€the€Unit€to€perform€tasks€directly€related€to€MedicareÏlitigation€œbetween›€Provident€œand›€the€federal€government.ÌÌà àà àEach€of€the€plaintiffs€was€an€employee€of€ProvidentÏprior€to€the€creation€of€the€Unit.€€In€1991,€the€plaintiffs,€saveÏone,€œsigned›€a€document€entitled€ð ðCorporate€Ethics€Policyðð€thatÏœprovided,€in€part,›€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 àMy€dated€signature€below€means€that€I€haveÏreceived€and€read€Providentððs€Corporate€EthicsÏPolicy€Manual,€and€that€I€understand€€I€amÏrequired€to€comply€with€both€the€letter€andÏthe€spirit€of€the€policies€in€the€manual€as€itÏis€presented€and€as€it€may€be€amended€fromÏtime€to€time€.€.€.€I€acknowledge€that€neitherÍmy€signature€below€nor€my€compliance€withÏthese€policies€creates€or€implies€anÏemployment€contract.€€I€understand€thatÏemployment€relationships€with€Provident€remainÏon€an€at€will€basis.ÌÌÌÌÓÓThe€plaintiff€Karen€œClark›€œHickman€did›€not€sign€this€document;€but,Ïalong€with€œfour€of€the›€other€plaintiffs,€she€did€sign€a€ProvidentÏemployment€application€containing€the€following€language:ÌÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àProvident€makes€no€representation€thatÏemployment€with€the€Company€is€for€anyÏspecified€term€of€years.€€While€ProvidentððsÏpast€record€can€be€illustrated€by€a€long„standing€tradition€of€job€security€and€loyaltyÏto€satisfactory€employees,€Provident€reservesÏthe€right€to€terminate€employees€for€theÏCompanyððs€best€interest,€for€unsatisfactoryÏjob€performance,€for€unsatisfactoryÏattendance,€for€violation€of€Company€rules€andÏpolicies,€because€an€individualððs€servicesÏbecome€excess€to€the€Companyððs€staffing€needs,Ïor€at€the€sole€discretion€of€Provident.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àProvident€claims€that€it€attempted€to€staff€the€UnitÏwith€employees€who€were€considered€to€be€ð ðat€riskðð€or€ð ðexcess,ððÏmeaning€that€they€ð ðwere€on€notice€that€their€jobs€were€beingÏeliminated€or€for€whom€there€was€a€significant€risk€ofÏtermination.ðð€€The€plaintiffs€dispute€the€companyððs€contention,Ïclaiming€that€they€were€not€advised€they€were€ð ðat€riskðð€withÍrespect€to€continued€employment€with€Provident.€€Whether€they€wereÏor€not€is€not€material€to€a€resolution€of€the€issues€in€this€case.ÌÌà àà àThe€plaintiffs€each€filed€an€affidavit€stating€asÏfollows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 àDuring€my€interview€for€employment€with€theÏMedicare€Litigation€Unit,€I€was€told€the€jobÏwould€last€between€2€ðð€to€3€years.€€I€wasÏnever€told€ð ðor€as€long€as€the€MedicareÏLitigation€lastedðð,€nor€was€there€anyÏreference€in€my€job€confirmation€as€to€myÏemployment€lasting€only€as€long€as€theÏMedicare€Litigation€lasts.€ÌÌà àà àIt€was€never€stated€to€me€in€any€interview€Ì€à8 àà8 àthat€the€position€for€which€I€was€to€be€hiredÏwas€ð ðtemporaryðð€in€nature.€€I€was€clearly€toldÏthe€job€would€last€between€2€ðð€to€3€years.ÌÌÌÌÓÓAs€each€plaintiff€was€hired€to€work€in€the€Unit,€that€personÏreceived€a€memorandum€labeled€ð ðjob€offer€confirmation.ðð€€TheseÏwere€identical€in€all€respects€except€for€name,€date€and€position.€ÏœEach€provided€as€follows:›ÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 àWe€are€excited€about€your€decision€to€acceptÏthe€[title]€position€in€the€MedicareÏLitigation€Claims€œOffice.›€€Since€you€will€beÏcoming€on€board€with€us€effective€[date],Ïthere€are€several€items€of€importantÏinformation€that€I€would€like€to€reiterate:ÌÌà àà à(1)à8 àThis€project€assignment€period€isÏbetween€€€€€€2€ðð€to€3€years.ÌÌà àà à(2)à8 àDue€to€the€sensitivity€of€theÏassignment€€€€€€for€MedicareÏLitigations€Unit,€you€will€à à€€€€Ïnot€be€eligible€for€job€posting€forÏ1€ðð€years.€ÌÌà àà à(3)à8 àConsistent€with€all€of€our€CompanyÏjob€à à€€€€€offers,€this€is€not€aÏcontractual€à à€€€€€agreement€forÏguaranteeing€future€à à€€€€Ïemployment.ÌÌà àà à(4)à8 àThe€office€will€be€located€inÏChattanooga€€€€€€and€will€beÏconsidered€a€field€office.ÌÌà8 àà8 àWe€trust€that€this€job€offer€œinformation›€forÏthe€Medicare€Litigation€Claims€office,Ïclarifies€or€confirms€what€has€been€previouslyÏdiscussed€with€you€at€some€point€during€theÏselection€process.€€If€you€have€additionalÏquestions,€please€feel€free€to€contact€me€orÏœSahira›€œSorrells›€at€extension€8959.ÌÌà8 àà8 àAgain,€weððre€excited€about€your€decision€andÏlook€forward€to€you€joining€the€MedicareÏLitigation€Claims€team!ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€Medicare€litigation€apparently€was€concluded€œsooner›Ïthan€anticipated.€€A€settlement€was€reached€with€the€federalÏgovernment€approximately€one€year€after€the€Unit€was€created.€ÏAfter€the€litigation€was€settled,€the€Unit€was€disbanded€and€theÍplaintiffs€were€discharged.€€The€duration€of€their€employmentÏranged€from€7€months,€25€days€to€10€months,€11€days.ÌÌà àà àThe€plaintiffs€claim€they€were€contractually€guaranteedÏemployment€for€a€period€of€2€ðð€to€3€years,€and€that€ProvidentÏmade€a€negligent€misrepresentation€when€it€told€each€of€them€thatÏtheir€jobs€with€the€Unit€would€last€that€long.€€Provident€deniesÏmaking€a€contractual€guarantee€of€employment€for€a€specific€term,Ïand€contends€that€it€expressly€informed€each€of€the€plaintiffsÏthat€ð ðthe€job€would€last€between€two€and€one„half€to€three€years,Ïor€as€long€as€the€Medicare€Litigation€lasted.ððÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€plaintiffsðð€employmentÏstatus€remained€ð ðat„willðð€throughout€the€course€of€theirÏemployment€with€Provident,€and€that€the€undisputed€material€factsÏdid€not€make€out€a€claim€for€breach€of€a€covenant€of€good€faithÏand€fair€dealing€or€for€negligent€misrepresentation,€as€a€matterÏof€law.€€The€trial€court€further€found€that€ð ð[œa]ny›€contract€ofÏemployment€œor€agreement€that›€existed€between€the€plaintiffs€andÏProvident€was€an€oral€contract,ðð€and€consequently€that€it€ð ðisÏunenforceable€under€the€Statute€of€Frauds.ððÌÌÓ  ÓIIÌÌÓ  Óà àà àOur€standard€of€review€in€a€summary€judgment€case€isÏwell„defined.€€In€deciding€whether€a€grant€of€summary€judgment€isÏappropriate,€we€must€determine€ð ðif€the€pleadings,€depositions,Ïanswers€to€interrogatories,€and€admissions€on€file,€together€withÏthe€affidavits,€if€any,€show€that€there€is€no€genuine€issue€as€toÏany€material€fact€and€that€the€moving€party€is€entitled€to€aÏjudgment€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€œCiv›.€P.€56.03.€€We€takeÏthe€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€theÏnonmoving€party,€allow€all€reasonable€inferences€from€thatÏevidence€in€its€favor,€and€discard€all€countervailing€evidence.€ÏòòSee€ò òByrd€v.€Hall,óóó ó€847€S.W.2d€208,€210„11€(Tenn.€1993).€€If,€afterÏapplying€this€standard,€we€find€that€there€are€no€genuine€issuesÏof€material€fact€and€that€the€moving€party€is€entitled€to€aÏjudgment€as€a€matter€of€law,€we€must€affirm€the€grant€of€summaryÏjudgment.€€ÌÌÓ  ÓIIIÌÌÓ  Óà àà àTennessee€recognizes€and€follows€the€ð ðat„willððÏemployment€doctrine,€meaning€that€in€the€absence€of€a€clearÍcontractual€agreement€to€the€contrary,€either€party€has€theÏconcomitant€right€to€terminate€the€employment€relationship€at€anyÏtime,€with€or€without€cause.€€ò òòòBennett€v.€œSteiner›„œLiff›€Iron€óó&ÏòòMetal€Co.,€óóó ó826€S.W.2d€119,€121€(Tenn.€1992).€€Prior€to€theÏcreation€of€the€Unit,€plaintiffs€were€clearly€employees„at„will,Ïand,€as€evidenced€by€the€documents€they€signed€in€1991,€they€wereÏwell€aware€of€their€at„will€status.€€œThis›€observation€does€not€endÏour€inquiry,€however,€because€Provident€and€the€plaintiffs€couldÏhave€later€modified€their€agreement€during€the€course€ofÏnegotiations€regarding€employment€with€the€Unit,€so€as€to€provideÏfor€a€definite€and€guaranteed€œterm›€of€employment.€€òòSee€ò òDavis€v.ÏConnecticut€Gen.€Life€œIns›.€Co.,€óóó ó743€œF.Supp›.€1273,€1278Ï(œM.D.Tenn›.€1990)€(ð ðthe€non„existence€of€a€definite€term€ofÏemployment€at€the€outset€œof€employment€does›€not€preclude€theÏmodification€of€the€employment€contract€to€provide€for€a€definiteÏterm.€.€.ðð);òòò ò€œShelby›€v.€Delta€Air€Lines,€Inc,€óóó ó842€œF.Supp›.€999,Ï1006€(œM.D.Tenn›.€1993).ÌÌà àà àPlaintiffs€contend€that€such€a€modification€occurred€inÏthis€case.€€The€plaintiffs€make€two€arguments€in€support€of€theirÏcontention.€€First,€they€argue€that€the€memorandum€entitled€ð ðjobÏoffer€confirmationðð€that€Provident€sent€each€of€them€constituted€aÍwritten€contract€for€a€definite€term€of€employment€for€2ðð€to€3Ïyears.€€Alternatively,€they€argue€if€the€memorandum€is€deemedÏinsufficient€to€create€an€express€written€contract,€that€they€andÏProvident€orally€contracted€for€such€a€guaranteed€term.€€In€thatÏinstance,€they€contend€the€memorandum€is€sufficient€to€satisfy€theÏð ðwritingðð€requirement€of€the€Statute€of€Frauds,€which€providesÏthat€no€action€shall€be€brought€upon€a€contract€not€to€beÏperformed€within€one€year,€ð ðunless€the€[contract],€upon€which€suchÏaction€shall€be€brought,€or€some€memorandum€or€note€thereof,€shallÏbe€in€writing.€.€.ðð€€œT.C.A.›€ðð€29„2„101(5).€€ÌÌà àà àRegarding€the€claim€of€a€written€contract,€this€courtÏrecently€considered€a€similar€contention€in€the€case€of€òòò òœLoeffler›Ïv.€œKjellgren›,€óóó ó884€S.W.2d€463€(œTenn.App›.€1994),€wherein€theÏfollowing€is€found:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 àœ.€.€.€there›€is€a€presumption€in€Tennessee€thatÏemployment€is€terminable€at€will.€òòò ò€Bates€v.ÏJim€Rule€Chevrolet,€Inc.,€ó óóóNo.€16òòò ò,€óóó ó1990€WLÏ51295,€at€*10€n.4€(œTenn.App›.€26€April€1990)Ï(citing€òòò òCombs€v.€Standard€Oil€Co.,€óóó ó166ÏTenn.€88,€59€S.W.2d€525€(1933)).€€OneÏTennessee€federal€œdistrict€court›€has€espousedÏthat€in€order€to€overcome€this€presumption,Ïòòthe€employer€must€use€specific€language€whichÏguarantees€employment€for€a€definite€timeóó.€Ïòòò òDavis€v.€Connecticut€Gen.€Life€œIns›.€Co.,Ïóóó ó743€œF.Supp›.€œ1273,›€1280€(œM.D.Tenn›.€1990).€€€€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòId.€óóat€468.€€(Emphasis€added).€€Also€relevant€to€the€presentÏanalysis€are€the€general€principles€of€contract€law€set€forth€inÏthe€case€of€ò òòòœJamestowne›€on€Signal,€Inc.€v.€First€Federal€œSav›.Ï&€Loan€œAssððn.,›€óóó ó807€S.W.2d€559,€564€(œTenn.App›.€1990):ÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIt€is€well€established€in€this€jurisdictionÏthat€a€contract€can€be€expressed,€implied,Ïwritten,€or€oral,€but€an€enforceable€contractÏmust,€among€other€elements,€result€from€aÏmeeting€of€the€minds€and€must€be€sufficientlyÏdefinite€to€be€enforced.€.€.The€contemplatedÏmutual€assent€and€meeting€of€the€minds€cannotÏbe€accomplished€by€the€unilateral€action€ofÏone€party,€nor€can€it€be€accomplished€by€anÏambiguous€course€of€dealing€between€the€twoÏparties€from€which€differing€inferencesÏregarding€continuation€or€modification€of€theÏoriginal€contract€might€reasonably€be€drawn.€€ÌÌÌÌòòId.€óóat€564€(citations€omitted).ÌÌÓÓÌà àà àThe€plaintiffsðð€contention€that€the€ð ðjob€offerÏconfirmationðð€memorandum€constituted€an€express€written€contractÏfor€a€specific€duration€must€be€rejected€for€at€least€threeÏreasons.€€First,€there€is€no€ð ðspecific€language€which€guaranteesÏœemploymentðð›€as€required€by€the€court€in€òòò òœLoeffler›óóó ó€to€remove€œan›Ïemployment€relationship€from€œan›€at„will€œstatus.›€€The€memorandumÍstates€only€that€ð ð[œt]his›€òòproject€assignmentóó€period€is€between€2€ððÏto€3€years.ðð€(emphasis€added).€€We€do€not€think€this€statement€canÏbe€ð ðbootstrappedðð€into€an€enforceable€promise€that€the€plaintiffsððÏòòemploymentóó€is€guaranteed€for€that€long.€€Second,€the€memorandumÏexpressly€states€the€following:€ð ð[œc]onsistent›€with€all€of€ourÏœCompany€job›€offers,€òòthis€is€not€a€contractual€agreement€forÏguaranteeing€future€employmentóó.ðð€œ(Emphasis›€added).€€It€would€beÏincongruous€to€find€a€œcontract›€between€the€parties€œguaranteeingÏemployment€in›€the€face€of€such€an€unequivocal€assertion€to€theÏcontrary€in€the€document€itself.€€Finally,€the€document€did€notÏstate€a€definite€term.€€The€œjob›€was€for€a€period€ð ðòòbetweenóó€2€ðð€toÏ3€years.ðð€€(Emphasis€added).€€The€memorandum€is€insufficient€as€aÏmatter€of€law€to€create€an€express€contract€of€the€nature€urged€byÏthe€plaintiffs.ÌÌà àà àThe€argument€that€the€parties€orally€contracted€for€aÏspecific€term€of€2ðð€to€3€years€must€fail€for€similar€reasons.€€WeÏexamine€the€affidavits€of€the€plaintiffs€in€order€to€determineÏwhether€their€statements,€accepted€by€us€as€true,€are€sufficientÏto€establish€the€existence€of€an€oral€contract€of€employment€for€aÏspecific€term.€€The€two€paragraphs€in€each€of€the€affidavits€thatÏare€relevant€to€this€inquiry€read€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 àDuring€my€interview€for€employment€with€theÏMedicare€Litigation€Unit,€I€was€told€œòòthe›€jobÏwould€last€óóbetween€2€ðð€to€3€years.€€I€wasÏnever€told€ð ðor€as€long€as€the€MedicareÏLitigation€lastedðð,€nor€was€there€anyÏreference€in€my€job€confirmation€as€to€myÏemployment€lasting€only€as€long€as€theÏMedicare€Litigation€lasts.€ÌÌà8 àà8 àIt€was€never€stated€to€me€in€any€interviewÏthat€the€position€for€which€I€was€to€be€hiredÏwas€ð ðtemporaryðð€in€nature.€€I€was€clearly€toldÏòòthe€job€would€last€óóbetween€2€ðð€to€3€years.ÌÌÌÌÓÓ(Emphasis€added).€€Even€accepting€these€statements€as€true,€as€weÏmust€under€our€summary€judgment€standard€of€review,€we€find€theyÏare€insufficient€as€a€matter€of€law€to€demonstrate€an€enforceableÏoral€contract€for€a€specific€term€of€employment.€€This€proof€showsÏonly€that€Provident€gave€the€plaintiffs€an€estimate€of€how€long€itÏanticipatedòò€óóthe€Medicare€litigationÔ% € Ô€would€last.€€The€plaintiffsÏhave€presented€no€evidence€suggesting€that€Provident€œguaranteed›Ïœòòtheir›€employmentóó€would€last€any€definite€duration.€€This€isÏfurther€supported€by€the€indefinite€nature€of€the€2€ðð€to€3€œyear›Ïperiod.€€Our€holding€on€this€matter€renders€moot€the€question€ofÏthe€application€of€the€Statute€of€Frauds€to€this€case.ÌÌÓ  ÓœIV›ÌÌÓ  Óà àà àœWe›€œnext€address›€the€plaintiffsðð€contention€thatÏProvident€was€guilty€of€negligent€misrepresentation€by€neglectingÏto€inform€them€that€their€positions€with€the€Unit€would€last€onlyÏas€long€as€the€Medicare€litigation€lasted.€€As€a€general€rule,€ÌÓÓÌÌà8 àà8 àa€party€may€be€held€liable€for€damages€causedÏby€his€failure€to€disclose€material€facts€toÏthe€same€extent€that€a€party€may€be€liable€forÏdamages€caused€by€fraudulent€or€negligentÏmisrepresentations.ÌÓÓÌÓÓÌÓÓòòò òMacon€County€Livestock€Market,€Inc.€v.€Kentucky€StateÏBank,€Inc.,€óóó ó724€S.W.2d€343,€349€(œTenn.App›.€1986),€òòò òGray€v.€BoyleÏInvestment€Co.,€óóó ó803€S.W.2d€678,€683€(œTenn.App›.€1990).€€LiabilityÏfor€nondisclosure€arises€only€where€the€person€sought€to€be€heldÏresponsible€has€a€duty€to€disclose€the€material€facts€at€issue.€Ïòòò òMacon€County,€óóó ó724€S.W.2d€at€349.€€ÌÌà àà àAccepting€all€of€plaintiffsðð€œproof›€on€this€matter€asÏtrue,€we€œdo€not€think›€it€œcan›€be€fairly€said€that€Provident€in€anyÏway€concealed€the€fact€that€the€plaintiffsðð€positions€with€theÏUnit€were€ð ðtemporaryðð€in€that€they€were€œtied›€œin€duration€to›€theÏMedicare€litigation€itself.€€Each€plaintiff€knew€that€he€or€sheÍwas€being€hired€for€a€position€in€a€unit€that€was€directly€relatedÏto€litigation.€€The€fact€that€Provident€gave€the€plaintiffs€anÏestimate€of€the€Unitððs€ð ðlifeðð€underscores€the€fact€that€œitsÏduration›€was€unclear€and€undeterminable.€€How€long€litigation€willÏlast€is€always€a€matter€of€conjecture.€€Furthermore,€it€isÏimplicit€in€any€position€œrelated›€œsolely€to›€specific€litigationÏœthat›€once€the€litigation€is€concluded,€the€position€is€concludedÏwith€œit.ÌÌà àà àThe›€Court€of€Appeals€has€stated€thatÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[a]€party€to€a€contract€has€a€duty€to€discloseÏto€the€other€party€any€material€fact€affectingÏthe€essence€of€the€subject€matter€of€theÏcontract,€unless€ordinary€diligence€would€haveÏrevealed€the€undisclosed€fact.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òœLonning›€v.€Jim€Walter€Homes,€Inc.,€óóó ó725€S.W.2d€682,€685Ï(œTenn.App›.€1986),òòò ò€œGarrett›€v.€œMazda›€Motors€of€America,€óóó ó844ÏS.W.2d€178,€181€(œTenn.App›.€1992).€€We€find€that€in€the€instantÏcase,€ordinary€common€sense€would€reveal€the€ð ðundisclosedðð€fact.€ÏIn€the€final€analysis,€Provident€made€it€clear€that€the€job€wasÏð ðtemporaryðð€by€making€no€promises€that€the€plaintiffsðð€positionsÏwould€last€for€a€specific€term;€its€memorandum€clearly€stated€thatÍð ðthis€is€not€a€contractual€agreement€for€guaranteeing€futureÏemployment.ðð€€It€was€not€necessary€to€tell€the€plaintiffs€thatÏwhen€the€work€of€the€Unit€was€completed,€their€jobs€wereÏcompleted.€€Their€jobs€had€no€œð ðlifeðð›€other€than€the€oneÏnecessitated€by€the€litigation.€€Provident€did€not€have€to€tellÏthe€plaintiffs€something€that€œwas€obvious›€from€the€dealingsÏbetween€the€œparties.ÌÌà@ àVÌÌà àà àFinally,€the€plaintiffs€contend€that€Provident,€byÏfailing€to€inform€them€that€their€positions€were€ð ðtemporaryðð€inÏthe€sense€that€they€were€tied€in€duration€to€the€MedicareÏlitigation,€breached€an€implied€covenant€of€good€faith€and€fairÏdealing€between€itself€and€the€plaintiffs.€€We€disagree.ÌÌà àà àIt€is€clear€that€parties€to€employment€contracts€areÏheld€to€a€standard€of€good€faith€and€fair€dealing.€€òòò òWilliams€v.ÏMaremont€Corp.,€óóó ó776€S.W.2d€78€(Tenn.App.€1988);€òòò òHooks€v.ÏGibson,€óóó ó842€S.W.2d€625€(Tenn.App.€1992).€€In€òòò òWilliams,€óóó óthe€courtÏstated€of€an€employment€contract,€ð ð[t]his€contract,€as€allÏcontracts,€impliedly€provides€for€good€faith€and€fair€dealingÍbetween€the€parties.ðð€€òòò òWilliams,€óóó ó776€S.W.2d€at€81.€€The€òòò òHooksÏóóó ócourt€noted€that€ð ðall€parties€to€contracts€are€held€to€the€duty€ofÏgood€faith€and€fair€dealing,€which€is€also€applicable€toÏemployment€contracts.ðð€€òòò òHooks,€óóó ó842€S.W.2d€at€628.ÌÌà àà àIn€the€instant€case,€Provident€did€not€breach€theÏcovenant€of€good€faith€and€fair€dealing.€€As€we€have€previouslyÏindicated,€each€of€the€plaintiffs€was€aware€that€his€or€herÏemployment€was€directly€tied€to€a€project€with€a€limited€life.€ÏSince€they€knew€this,€and€since€each€of€them€acknowledged€inÏwriting€that€their€employment€was€at„will,€they€cannot€now€claimÏthat€they€were€treated€unfairly€when€their€employment€wasÏterminated.€€ÌÌà àà àFor€the€aforementioned€reasons,€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court€is€affirmed€and€this€case€remanded€for€collection€ofÏcosts€assessed€below€pursuant€to€applicable€law.€€Costs€on€appealÏare€taxed€and€assessed€to€appellants.€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCharles€D.€Susano›,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ________________________ÌHouston€M.€œGoddard›,€œP.J.›ÌÌÌÌ________________________ÌœHerschel›€P.€Franks,€J.Ô€"Ô