Facts: Joseph Britt, a detective, enrolled in a Master’s Degree program at Chestnut Hill College in Pennsylvania. Chestnut Hill promised students credit for life experience. The college promised Britt important credits for his life experience if he enrolled, and after he did enroll, the school awarded the promised credits.

Britt took a one-week required course entitled “Gender Stereotyping,” taught by Professor Klee. As part of a classroom exercise, Klee directed another student, who Britt claimed was a “known” homosexual, to make physical advances toward Britt. The student complied by telling Britt that he was attracted to him and by touching Britt above the knee. Britt rejected the student’s advances. The next day, Klee assigned that same student to serve as a “facilitator” to “deal with Britt’s anger.” Klee became openly critical of Britt’s attitude and performance in the class and awarded him a “C” grade for the course. 

Britt claimed that Klee thereafter did everything within his power to sabotage Britt’s reputation and academic career. Klee arranged to have himself assigned as Britt’s academic advisor and, after doing so, personally revoked, and successfully persuaded other instructors to revoke, the life experience credits that had been granted to Britt upon admission to the college. The revocation of those credits caused Britt not to graduate as scheduled.

Britt sued. The trial court dismissed his contract claim, essentially ruling that a college had an absolute right to award and revoke credits as it saw fit. Britt appealed.

Questions:

1. Did Britt have an implied contractual right to receive credits from the college for life experience?

2. What should Britt argue to convince the court of his implied contract claim?

3. What should the college argue to refute Britt’s claim?