ÿWPC/ Ì€Á3 ì}ýÞí8]íE€öå0@Ë›µ’#û¨c ‹>mÀ.´ŽÒ½Š‘pà¾) L¯¤Kv k]¤÷#çy³q¢zfH:HòjÓÙ ŒßÂÌ &ö“Ôôûfô"‡£‰6AX×í+È.ÉMv BÓz¡g|àœiØÿЃ  ”y»¯ø™âOœ+’ß4Fr A1rêi~ÚnïùRÅÚwÌTFK.})Ô/‹ÒIÚîÏJLäªd2 ¯ÊK°íìÿK04Ü¥j¯ÔHAt8óìnXð¥Xz.¬yB‹àI'#ÙÑ*ƒAÒ!òf7&‰zÌ•!mŽ+Ñð²ñ C®—àuG´ò÷’8øHºç¨úŠìª·—i1Ø.Ÿ|Ìw)Ü‚S µ))ÛÛF¸bâïJŽqf†ÑèÔ°e_Ö`ø½µ{§ÃuhzÆ[Ü5µàR;–£X&íµI¯_±áÙÖ¸ sp\–›‡TðŠm¥;¡Í`1É‘xÆ›—,ø‹à”£”Y‡2\ÎX¸åúAÄB¦aõ”ùØÏlypOQç6§)™ýôã v±Ý&‘ÈYÙyü«4 ém"n"(ÄŠµ’ñô7øc{K q)ÛÎÆT¥šð2_Tb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ 0D‘ ÆÕ Æ› Æa Æ'GíN4²6:èE""""""""""""""""""""""""b$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 0ë,,,, B 0¤4 D3Ø D-  0K88 ASƒÆÖ 0¤œ 0D@ A«„»Gr‘-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular¬|&-ê:i¢×+003|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 =Ý ƒR÷9$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Plaintiff€claims€the€Handbook€constitutes€a€contract,€but€points€us€to€no€specific€language€evidencing€theÐ ° ÐCollegeððs€intent€to€be€contractually€bound€to€its€contents.€ ¨Ý ƒR÷9$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€In€relevant€part,€Rule€12.02€provides€that€if,€ð ðon€a€motion€asserting€the€defense€numbered€(6)€to€dismiss€forÐ ° Ðfailure€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€can€be€granted,€matters€outside€the€pleading€are€presented€to€and€not€excludedÐ tÄ Ðby€the€court,€the€motion€shall€be€treated€as€one€for€summary€judgment€and€disposed€of€as€provided€in€Rule€56,€and€allÐ 8ˆ Ðparties€shall€be€given€reasonable€opportunity€to€present€all€material€made€pertinent€to€such€a€motion€by€Rule€56.ððÐ üL ÐÌ€  TZE COA P.J.UnguraitUSMLEQuillen ETSU CBLCowdenSovranDownenMcCarley OmerCarvellLesureWootena]ctionsNat'l- ù-(|G2÷9$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô ò»»Ô d(|3?a$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?a$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼»»»ÔÑ8€DIXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼»îî #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓNovember€12,€2002€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XDIX»¼ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»XXDIö#ÔTZE„PONG€"RAYMOND"€KU€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEÔ‡XDIX»¼Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òÔ#†¼»XXDIg#ÔÔ€XDIX»¼ÔAppeal€from€the€Claims€Commission€of€the€State€of€TennesseeÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€20200433€€€€€€Vance€W.€Cheek,€Jr.,€CommissionerÐ æ 6 ÐÌFILED€DECEMBER€17,€2002Ð ¾   Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2002„01076„COA„R3„CVÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÓ  ÓÌÔ_ÔTzeÔ_Ô„Pong€ð ðRaymondðð€Ku€(ð ðPlaintiffðð)€is€a€student€at€the€East€Tennessee€State€University€CollegeÐ xÈ  Ðof€Medicine€(ð ðCollegeðð).€€After€completing€his€first€two€years€of€study,€Plaintiff€was€required€to€takeÐ d´ Ðthe€USMLE€Step€1€examination.€€He€took€this€examination€and€failed.€€Thereafter,€the€CollegeÐ P  Ðremoved€Plaintiff€from€his€third€year€clerkships€and€eventually€created€a€list€of€requirements€he€hadÐ <Œ Ðto€meet€in€order€to€be€allowed€to€resume€his€classes.€€After€successfully€suing€the€College€in€federalÐ (x Ðcourt€based€on€a€procedural€due€process€violation,€Plaintiff€brought€the€present€lawsuit€for€damagesÐ d Ðagainst€the€State€of€Tennessee€claiming€breach€of€written€contract,€to€wit:€his€letter€of€acceptanceÐ P Ðto€the€College€and€the€Collegeððs€student€handbook.€€The€Claims€Commission€concluded€theseÐ ì< Ðdocuments€did€not€constitute€a€written€contract€and€dismissed€the€lawsuit€for€lack€of€subject€matterÐ Ø( Ðjurisdiction.€Plaintiff€appeals,€and€we€affirm.€€Ð Ä ÐÌÌÌò òà@µ µ ìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€theˆÐ tÄ Ðà@ò ò ìàClaims€Commission€Affirmed;€Case€Remanded.ó óˆÐ `° ÐÌòòÌD.€Michael€Ô_ÔSwineyÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHouston€M.€Ô_ÔGoddardÔ_Ô,€P.J.,óó€òòóóÐ $"t! Ðand€òòHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.óó,€joined.Ð #`" ÐÌÌArthur€F.€Knight,€III,€and€Samuel€W.€Brown,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant€Ô_ÔTzeÔ_Ô„PongÐ Ô%$!% Ðð ðRaymondðð€Ku.Ð À&"& ÐÌÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General,€Michael€E.€Moore,€Solicitor€General,€and€Donald€R.€Ungurait,Ð „)Ô$) ÐAssistant€Attorney€General,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee€State€of€Tennessee.Ð p*À%* ÐÐ  \+¬&+ýC ÐÔ_Ôà@66'ìàò òOPINIONˆÐ ° ÐÌà@ÛÛ%ìàòòBackgroundóóó óˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àThis€case€involves€a€claim€by€Plaintiff€against€the€State€for€breach€of€contract.€Ð `° ÐAccording€to€the€complaint,€Plaintiff€was€accepted€to€medical€school€and€began€his€first€year€in€theÐ L œ Ðfall€of€1996.€€Plaintiff€successfully€completed€his€first€and€second€year€courses.€€During€the€summerÐ 8 ˆ Ðfollowing€the€second€year,€Plaintiff€was€required€to€take€the€USMLE€Step€1€examination,€as€set€forthÐ $ t Ðin€the€Collegeððs€policies€and€procedures.€€This€examination€must€be€passed€before€the€beginning€ofÐ  ` Ðthe€studentððs€fourth€year.€€Plaintiff€claims€students€who€do€not€pass€this€examination€are€allowed€toÐ ü L  Ðbegin€their€third€year€clerkships,€but€they€are€subject€to€dismissal€if€they€do€not€pass€this€examinationÐ è 8  Ðafter€three€attempts.€€Plaintiff€failed€the€examination€on€his€first€attempt€and€intended€to€retake€theÐ Ô$  Ðexamination€in€October€of€1998.€€Plaintiff€began€his€third€year€clerkship€in€the€summer€of€1998,€butÐ À  Ðclaims€he€was€pulled€from€all€of€his€rotations€by€the€Collegeððs€administration.€€The€reasons€givenÐ ¬ü  ÐPlaintiff€for€being€pulled€from€rotations€were€alleged€behavioral€problems.€€Plaintiff€claims€he€neverÐ ˜è  Ðwas€told€of€any€behavioral€problems€prior€to€being€pulled€from€the€rotations.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€pursued€the€Collegeððs€internal€appeal€procedures€in€an€attempt€to€maintainÐ \¬ Ðhis€enrollment.€€He€was€denied€relief€at€each€level€of€the€process.€€Plaintiff€even€underwentÐ H˜ Ðpsychological€testing€at€the€Collegeððs€request.€€In€September€of€1999,€Plaintiff€requested€he€beÐ 4„ Ðallowed€to€return€to€his€medical€studies.€€In€response,€Daniel€Wooten€(ð ðWootenðð),€the€ExecutiveÐ  p ÐAssociate€Dean€for€Academic€and€Faculty€Affairs,€sent€Plaintiff€a€letter€detailing€certain€conditionsÐ  \ ÐPlaintiff€had€to€agree€to€in€order€to€return€to€classes.€€These€conditions€were:€1)€Plaintiffððs€retakingÐ øH Ðhis€sophomore€classes;€2)€always€being€on€time€for€class;€and€3)€being€given€a€ð ðbatteryðð€of€oralÐ ä4 Ðexams€at€the€end€of€the€1999€fall€semester€and€the€2000€spring€semester€which€must€be€passed.€Ð Ð  ÐPlaintiff€also€was€informed€a€structured€evaluation€of€his€performance€would€be€conducted€at€the€endÐ ¼  Ðof€each€semester€prior€to€his€continuing€in€school.€€According€to€Wootenððs€letter,€only€if€PlaintiffÐ ¨ø Ðsuccessfully€completed€the€foregoing€would€he€be€allowed€to€retake€the€USMLE€Step€1€examination.€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€sued€in€federal€court€asserting,€among€other€things,€that€he€was€deniedÐ l¼ Ðprocedural€due€process€by€the€College.€€On€June€7,€2001,€the€United€States€District€Court€for€theÐ X ¨ ÐEastern€District€of€Tennessee€issued€a€memorandum€opinion€finding€Plaintiffððs€constitutional€dueÐ D!” Ðprocess€rights€had€been€violated.€€The€United€States€District€Court€ordered€the€College€to€allowÐ 0"€  ÐPlaintiff€to€re„enter€medical€school,€resume€his€junior€clerkships,€and€take€the€USMLE€Step€1Ð #l! Ðexamination€when€he€felt€ready€to€do€so.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€then€brought€this€lawsuit€against€the€State€claiming€breach€of€a€writtenÐ à%0!$ Ðcontract.€€According€to€Plaintiff,€he€had€a€written€contract€for€the€provision€of€educational€servicesÐ Ì&"% Ðbetween€him€and€the€College€by€virtue€of€the€Collegeððs€letter€of€acceptance,€the€Collegeððs€catalogs,Ð ¸'#& Ðand€other€relevant€written€policies€and€procedures.€€Plaintiff€sought€one€million€dollars€inÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcompensatory€damages.€€Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àà ` àThe€State€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€claiming€there€was€no€written€contract€as€requiredÐ ° Ðâ âby€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(1)(L),€which€provides€for€a€cause€of€action€against€the€State€basedÐ œì Ðon:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àActions€for€breach€of€a€written€contract€between€the€claimant€and€theÐ `° Ðstate€which€was€executed€by€one€(1)€or€more€state€officers€orÐ L œ Ðemployees€with€authority€to€execute€the€contract€ð8ð.Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌThe€State€argued€that€because€there€was€no€written€contract,€the€Claims€Commission€lacked€subjectÐ  ` Ðmatter€jurisdiction€over€the€claim.€€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€responded€to€the€motion€to€dismiss€by€claiming€the€East€Tennessee€StateÐ Ô$  ÐUniversity€Medical€Student€Handbook€(ð ðHandbookðð€or€ð ðCatalogðð)€and€his€acceptance€letter,€bothÐ À  Ðof€which€were€signed€by€a€representative€of€the€College,€constituted€a€written€contract.€€TheÐ ¬ü  ÐHandbook€is€signed€by€Wooten,€and€the€introduction€states,€òòinter€aliaóó:Ð ˜è  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àComplex€social€institutions€such€as€medical€schools€mustÐ pÀ Ðhave€pervasive€rules€that€govern€conduct€and€operationalÐ \¬ Ðeffectiveness.€€Thus,€the€James€H.€Quillen€College€of€Medicine€hasÐ H˜ Ðproclaimed€policies,€procedures,€and€guidelines€to€monitor€studentÐ 4„ Ðaffairs€that€are€designed€to€ascertain€that€all€members€of€our€academicÐ  p Ðcommunity€are€knowledgeable€about€what€is€expected€of€them€andÐ  \ Ðare€treated€justly.€€ÐøH` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€primary€purpose€of€this€manual€is€to€incorporate€into€aÐ Ð  Ðsingle€volume€those€policies,€procedures,€and€guidelines€that€mostÐ ¼  Ðdirectly€impact€students.€€Thus,€it€is€imperative€that€all€studentsÐ ¨ø Ðfamiliarize€themselves€with€the€contents.Дä` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àObviously,€no€policy€statement,€whatever€craft€accompaniesÐ l¼ Ðits€establishment,€can€fully€anticipate€all€situations.€€However,€ourÐ X ¨ ÐCollege€of€Medicine€recognizes€its€obligation€to€maintainÐ D!” Ðresponsiveness€to€individual€needs.€€Therefore,€any€student€whoÐ 0"€  Ðbelieves€that€individual€circumstances€justify€action€inconsistent€withÐ #l! Ða€certain€policy€stated€herein€should€come€to€my€office€withoutÐ $X" Ðhesitation.ð8ðÐô$D #` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€the€beginning€of€the€section€of€the€Handbook€setting€forth€the€Collegeððs€PoliciesÐ Ì&"% Ðand€Procedures,€the€following€ð ðdisclaimerðð€is€found:Ð ¸'#& ÐÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* Ðà@!!%ìàò òDisclaimeró óˆÐ ° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€policies€contained€herein€are€provided€to€give€a€generalÐ ˆØ Ðunderstanding€of€the€regulations€governing€East€Tennessee€StateÐ tÄ ÐUniversity€and€the€James€H.€Quillen€College€of€Medicine.€€They€areÐ `° Ðsubject€to€revision€at€any€time€with€little€or€no€advance€notification.€Ð L œ ÐThe€College€of€Medicine€assumes€no€responsibility€for€errors€in€orÐ 8 ˆ Ðmisrepresentation€of€these€policies.€€For€more€information€on€theÐ $ t Ðofficial€policies€of€ETSU€and€the€College€of€Medicine€contact€theÐ  ` ÐOffice€of€Academic€Affairs.€€Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€Commissioner€agreed€with€the€Stateððs€position€and€concluded€there€was€noÐ Ô$  Ðwritten€contract€between€the€parties,€and,€therefore,€dismissed€the€Complaint€for€lack€of€subjectÐ À  Ðmatter€jurisdiction.€€Plaintiff€appeals,€arguing€the€letter€of€acceptance€and€the€Handbook€constituteÐ ¬ü  Ða€written€contract.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà@))%ìàò òòòDiscussionó óóóˆÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àSince€matters€outside€the€pleadings€were€considered€by€the€Commission€when€itÐ H˜ Ðgranted€the€Stateððs€motion€to€dismiss,€we€will€treat€the€Stateððs€motion€as€a€motion€for€summaryÐ 4„ Ðjudgment€in€accordance€with€Rule€12.02.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€standard€for€review€of€a€motion€for€summaryÐ  p Ðjudgment€is€set€forth€in€òòStaples€v.€CBL€&€Associates,€Inc.óó,€15€S.W.3d€83€(Tenn.€2000):Ð  \ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€standards€governing€an€appellate€courtððs€review€of€aÐ ä4 Ðmotion€for€summary€judgment€are€well€settled.€€Since€our€inquiryÐ Ð  Ðinvolves€purely€a€question€of€law,€no€presumption€of€correctnessÐ ¼  Ðattaches€to€the€lower€courtððs€judgment,€and€our€task€is€confined€toÐ ¨ø Ðreviewing€the€record€to€determine€whether€the€requirements€of€Tenn.Ð ”ä ÐR.€Civ.€P.€56€have€been€met.€€òòSee€Hunter€v.€Brownóó,€955€S.W.2d€49,Ð €Ð Ð50„51€(Tenn.€1997);€òòCowden€v.€Sovran€Bank/Central€Southóó,€816Ð l¼ ÐS.W.2d€741,€744€(Tenn.€1991).€€Tennessee€Rule€of€Civil€ProcedureÐ X ¨ Ð56.04€provides€that€summary€judgment€is€appropriate€where:€(1)€thereÐ D!” Ðis€no€genuine€issue€with€regard€to€the€material€facts€relevant€to€theÐ 0"€  Ðclaim€or€defense€contained€in€the€motion,€òòsee€Byrd€v.€Hallóó,€847Ð #l! ÐS.W.2d€208,€210€(Tenn.€1993);€and€(2)€the€moving€party€is€entitledÐ $X" Ðto€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law€on€the€undisputed€facts.€€òòSeeÐ ô$D # ÐAnderson€v.€Standard€Register€Co.óó,€857€S.W.2d€555,€559€(Tenn.Ð à%0!$ Ð1993).€€The€moving€party€has€the€burden€of€proving€that€its€motionÐ ° Ðsatisfies€these€requirements.€€òòSee€Downen€v.€Allstate€Ins.€Co.óó,€811Ð œì ÐS.W.2d€523,€524€(Tenn.€1991).€€When€the€party€seeking€summaryÐ ˆØ Ðjudgment€makes€a€properly€supported€motion,€the€burden€shifts€to€theÐ tÄ Ðnonmoving€party€to€set€forth€specific€facts€establishing€the€existenceÐ `° Ðof€disputed,€material€facts€which€must€be€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€Ð L œ ÐòòSee€Byrd€v.€Hallóó,€847€S.W.2d€at€215.Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àTo€properly€support€its€motion,€the€moving€party€must€eitherÐ  ` Ðaffirmatively€negate€an€essential€element€of€the€non„moving€partyððsÐ ü L  Ðclaim€or€conclusively€establish€an€affirmative€defense.€€òòSee€McCarleyÐ è 8  Ðv.€West€Quality€Food€Serv.óó,€960€S.W.2d€585,€588€(Tenn.€1998);Ð Ô$  ÐòòRobinson€v.€Omeróó,€952€S.W.2d€423,€426€(Tenn.€1997).€€If€the€movingÐ À  Ðparty€fails€to€negate€a€claimed€basis€for€the€suit,€the€non„movingÐ ¬ü  Ðpartyððs€burden€to€produce€evidence€establishing€the€existence€of€aÐ ˜è  Ðgenuine€issue€for€trial€is€not€triggered€and€the€motion€for€summaryÐ „Ô  Ðjudgment€must€fail.€€òòSee€McCarley€v.€West€Quality€Food€Serv.óó,€960Ð pÀ ÐS.W.2d€at€588;€òòRobinson€v.€Omeróó,€952€S.W.2d€at€426.€€If€the€movingÐ \¬ Ðparty€successfully€negates€a€claimed€basis€for€the€action,€the€non„Ð H˜ Ðmoving€party€may€not€simply€rest€upon€the€pleadings,€but€must€offerÐ 4„ Ðproof€to€establish€the€existence€of€the€essential€elements€of€the€claim.Ð p` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€standards€governing€the€assessment€of€evidence€in€theÐ øH Ðsummary€judgment€context€are€also€well€established.€€Courts€mustÐ ä4 Ðview€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€nonmoving€partyÐ Ð  Ðand€must€also€draw€all€reasonable€inferences€in€the€nonmovingÐ ¼  Ðpartyððs€favor.€€òòSee€Robinson€v.€Omeróó,€952€S.W.2d€at€426;€òòByrd€v.Ð ¨ø ÐHallóó,€847€S.W.2d€at€210„11.€€Courts€should€grant€a€summaryÐ ”ä Ðjudgment€only€when€both€the€facts€and€the€inferences€to€be€drawnÐ €Ð Ðfrom€the€facts€permit€a€reasonable€person€to€reach€only€oneÐ l¼ Ðconclusion.€€òòSee€McCall€v.€Wilderóó,€913€S.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.Ð X ¨ Ð1995);€òòCarvell€v.€Bottomsóó,€900€S.W.2d€23,€26€(Tenn.€1995).ÐD!”` x` x ÐÌòòStaplesóó,€15€S.W.3d€at€88„89.€A€fact€is€ð ðmaterialðð€for€summary€judgment€purposes,€if€it€ð ðmust€beÐ #l! Ðdecided€in€order€to€resolve€the€substantive€claim€or€defense€at€which€the€motion€is€directed.ðð€€òòLutherÐ $X" Ðv.€Comptonóó,€5€S.W.3d€635,€639€(Tenn.€1999)(quoting€òòByrd€v.€Hallóó,€847€S.W.2d€at€211).Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àà ` àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307€confers€jurisdiction€on€the€Tennessee€ClaimsÐ Ì&"% ÐCommission€to€entertain€monetary€claims€against€the€State€based€upon€certain€specified€causes€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðaction.€€ò òó óTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(1)(L)€states€that€the€Commission€has€jurisdiction€to€determineÐ ¤(ô#' Ða€monetary€claim€against€the€State€based€upon€ð ð[a]ctions€for€breach€of€a€written€contract€betweenÐ )à$( Ðâ âthe€claimant€and€the€state€which€was€executed€by€one€(1)€or€more€state€officers€or€employees€withÐ |*Ì%) Ðauthority€to€execute€the€contract€ð8ð.ðð€€What€we€must€decide€on€this€appeal€is€whether€the€undisputedÐ ° Ðmaterial€facts€demonstrate€Plaintiff€did€not€have€a€written€contract€with€the€State.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffððs€main€argument€that€the€Handbook€constitutes€a€written€contract€is€basedÐ tÄ Ðon€òòLesure€v.€Stateóó,€€No.€89„347„II,€1990€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€355€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€18,€1990).€€InÐ `° ÐòòLesureóó,€this€Court€concluded€there€was€a€contract€between€that€plaintiff€and€the€state€based€onÐ L œ ÐTennessee€State€Universityððs€catalog.€€The€catalog€in€that€case,€however,€expressly€stated€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðprovisions€of€the€ð ðcatalog€constitute€a€contract€between€the€university€and€a€student€who€commencesÐ $ t Ðany€program€of€study€insofar€as€it€relates€to€the€degree€requirements€for€that€program€during€theÐ  ` Ðeffective€period€of€this€catalog€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòLesureóó,€1990€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€355€at€*€6.€€No€such€languageÐ ü L  Ðis€contained€in€the€Collegeððs€handbook.€€In€addition€to€the€quoted€language,€the€òòLesureóó€case€wasÐ è 8  Ðdecided€pursuant€to€a€version€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(1)(L)€which€no€longer€exists.€€TheseÐ Ô$  Ðare€distinctions€with€a€difference,€as€recently€noted€by€this€Court€in€òòPetty€v.€Stateóó,€2002€Tenn.€App.Ð À  ÐLEXIS€193€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Mar.€18,€2002),€òòno€appl.€perm.€appeal€filedóó,€which€involved€a€claim€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€University€of€Tennesseeððs€student€catalog€constituted€a€written€contract.€€In€òòPettyóó,€this€CourtÐ ˜è  Ðstated:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àPlaintiff€alleges€that€she€has€a€written€contract€with€theÐ \¬ ÐUniversity€of€Tennessee€which€is€embodied€in€the€student€catalog.€Ð H˜ ÐShe€relies€upon€the€unreported€opinion€of€this€Court€in€òòLesure€v.Ð 4„ ÐStateóó,€1990€WL€64533€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€18,€1990),€wherein€thisÐ  p ÐCourt€held€that€the€catalog€of€Tennessee€State€University€constitutedÐ  \ Ða€contract€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð9„8„307(a)(1)(L).€€RelianceÐ øH Ðon€the€òòLesureóó€case€is€misplaced,€because€the€catalog€at€issue€inÐ ä4 ÐòòLesureóó€expressly€stated€that€its€provisions€constituted€a€contractÐ Ð  Ðbetween€the€university€and€the€student,€and€the€University€ofÐ ¼  ÐTennessee€catalog€at€issue€does€not.€€Moreover,€the€òòLesureóó€case€wasÐ ¨ø Ðdecided€when€a€prior€version€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð9„8„307(a)(1)(L)Ð ”ä Ðwas€in€effect,€which€merely€required€the€action€to€be€founded€uponÐ €Ð Ðð ðany€express€contract€or€breach€thereofðð€but€did€not€require€theÐ l¼ Ðcontract€to€be€written€and€signed€by€an€authorized€officer€orÐ X ¨ Ðemployee.€€Thus,€the€òòLesureóó€case€is€not€applicable.ÐD!”` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àFinally,€plaintiff€seeks€to€bolster€her€argument€that€a€writtenÐ #l! Ðcontract€existed€by€stating€that€the€Universityððs€catalog,€inÐ $X" Ðconjunction€with€her€transcript€of€grades€which€contains€the€signatureÐ ô$D # Ðof€the€registrar,€satisfies€the€requirements€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð9„8„Ð à%0!$ Ð307(a)(1)(L).€€The€transcript,€however,€does€nothing€more€than€reportÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€grades€which€plaintiff€earned€in€her€course€work.€€We€find€noÐ ¸'#& Ðlanguage€in€the€transcript€which€would€constitute€the€terms€of€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcontract.€Ð)à$(` x` x Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àAs€the€Supreme€Court€observed€in€òòJohnson€v.€Central€Nat'lÐ ° Ðâ âIns.€Co.óó,€356€S.W.2d€277,€281€(Tenn.€1962):€€Ðœì` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0¸ ` x` xàWhile€a€contract€may€be€either€expressed€or€implied,€orÐ tÄ Ðwritten€or€oral,€it€must€result€from€a€meeting€of€the€minds€ofÐ `° Ðthe€parties€in€mutual€assent€to€the€terms,€must€be€based€uponÐ L œ Ða€sufficient€consideration,€free€from€fraud€or€undue€influence,Ð 8 ˆ Ðnot€against€public€policy€and€sufficiently€definite€to€beÐ $ t Ðenforced.€€Ð `¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€transcript€does€not€contain€any€definite€terms€to€be€enforced,€andÐ è 8  Ðdoes€not€result€from€a€meeting€of€the€minds.€€Reading€it€inÐ Ô$  Ðconjunction€with€the€catalog€is€of€no€consequence,€since€the€catalogÐ À  Ðexplicitly€sets€forth€that€its€terms€are€subject€to€change€without€notice,Ð ¬ü  Ðand€that€it€should€not€be€relied€upon.€€Ð˜è ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àWe€hold€that€plaintiff€has€failed€to€satisfy€the€requirements€ofÐ pÀ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð9„8„307(a)(1)(L),€and€we€affirm€theÐ \¬ ÐCommissionerððs€Order€dismissing€this€action.€ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌòòPettyóó,€2002€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€193€at€**€2„4.€€By€way€of€footnote,€the€òòPettyóó€Court€observed€theÐ  p ÐUniversity€of€Tennessee€catalog€contained€a€statement€which€told€students€that€its€provisions€wereÐ  \ Ðconstantly€under€review,€subject€to€change€at€any€time,€and€should€not€be€relied€upon.€€òòId.óó€at€*3€fn.1.Ð øH ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€believe€the€present€case€is€quite€similar€to€òòPettyóó.€€The€Handbook€does€not€stateÐ Ð  Ðit€is€intended€to€be€a€contract.€€The€Handbook€acknowledges€the€difficulty€in€anticipating€allÐ ¼  Ðsituations,€and€that€the€contents€of€the€Handbook€are€subject€to€revision€at€any€time€ð ðwith€little€orÐ ¨ø Ðno€advance€notification.ðð€€Furthermore,€the€College€expressly€assumed€no€responsibility€for€errorsÐ ”ä Ðin€or€misrepresentations€of€the€policies.€€After€reviewing€the€entire€Handbook׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×,€it€is€our€opinion€theÐ €Ð Ðundisputed€material€facts€demonstrate€the€State€did€not€intend€to€be€contractually€bound€to€theÐ l¼ Ðcontents€of€the€Handbook.€€òòCf.€Smith€v.€Morrisóó,€778€S.W.2d€857,€858€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1988)(WhileÐ X ¨ Ða€handbook€can€be€part€of€an€employment€contract,€ð ðthe€specific€language€of€the€handbook€mustÐ D!” Ðshow€contractual€intent.ðð).€€We€agree€with€the€Commission€that€the€Collegeððs€Handbook€does€notÐ 0"€  Ðconstitute€a€written€contract.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€also€argues€the€letter€wherein€he€was€accepted€to€the€College€also€constitutesÐ ô$D # Ða€written€contract.€€The€letter€is€dated€July€14,€1992,€and€extends€an€offer€to€Plaintiff€to€ð ðjoin€EastÐ à%0!$ ÐTennessee€State€Universityððs€Premedical„Medical€Program.ðð€€The€letter€also€explains€certainÐ Ì&"% Ðrequirements€Plaintiff€must€undertake€should€he€choose€to€accept€the€invitation.€€The€undisputedÐ ¸'#& Ðmaterial€facts€show:€a)€€Plaintiff€was€offered€acceptance€into€the€College;€b)€Plaintiff€accepted€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðoffer;€and€c)€Plaintiff€was€admitted€into€the€College.€€Even€assuming,€without€deciding,€the€offer€toÐ ° Ðjoin€the€Collegeððs€medical€program€was€a€written€contract€for€purposes€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„Ð œì Ð307(a)(1)(L),€this€contract€had€long€since€been€completed€by€the€time€the€events€giving€rise€to€theÐ ˆØ Ðpresent€lawsuit€occurred€and,€therefore,€cannot€form€the€basis€of€the€present€lawsuit.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€written€documents€relied€upon€by€Plaintiff,€either€separately€or€together,€do€notÐ L œ Ðconstitute€a€written€contract.€€Therefore,€the€decision€of€the€Claims€Commission€dismissingÐ 8 ˆ ÐPlaintiffððs€claim€for€lack€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€was€proper.€€We€hold€Plaintiff€has€failed€toÐ $ t Ðsatisfy€the€requirements€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(1)(L),€and€we€affirm€the€CommissionerððsÐ  ` ÐOrder€dismissing€this€action.Ð ü L  ÐÌà@  %ìàò òòòConclusionó óóóˆÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€Claims€Commission€is€affirmed,€and€this€cause€is€remanded€toÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€Claims€Commission€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€required,€if€any,€consistent€with€thisÐ ˜è  ÐOpinion.€€The€costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€Appellant€Tze„Pong€ð ðRaymondðð€Ku,€and€hisÐ „Ô  Ðsurety.€€Ð pÀ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  p Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€JUDGE