Our legal team at Charles W. Miller & Associates is representing a client in a breach of contract case against their former employer, the University of Louisville. The case is disputing when a mailed employment agreement from a university is a binding contract for a tenure-track professor. Although the University of Louisville typically hires tenure-track professors through letter agreements, the school contends that such agreements do not constitute contracts.
We filed a lawsuit on behalf of our client against the University of Louisville in 2016 that accused the school, a former department chair, and a retired dean of breach of contract and making fraudulent misrepresentations when they hired our client.
The case has made its way through the Kentucky Court of Appeals where the university argued that the letter agreement it had with our client, a former assistant professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Louisville’s J.B. Speed School of Engineering, does not constitute a contract.
However, in the court’s ruling, Judge Kramer said, “after careful review, we affirm in part, and remand for dismissal of [our client’s] claim for breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing … Based on the facts of this case, we hold that a written employment contract existed between [our client] and U of L .”
Speaking about the case, attorney Charles Miller said, “We claim that the university promised certain things … the main thing being the promise to provide timely doctoral support, and they failed to do that in a reasonably timely fashion.”
Attorney Miller, who graduated from the University of Louisville himself had the following to say about the institution’s practices:
“It’s very concerning to me. If I were a tenure-track professor, it would be a big red flag to me.”
Although high-profile positions, such as the head basketball coach, have “finely crafted employee contracts,” Attorney miller warns that most professors have the same documents as our client.
Our lawsuit is seeking compensation for past and future lost wages, personal indignity and humiliation, loss of opportunity, unnecessary relocation expenditures, and damages to our client’s reputation.
To find out more about this lawsuit, click here.