Morgan v. American University
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
534 A.2d 323 (1987)
- Written by Mike Begovic, JD
Facts
Phillip Morgan (plaintiff) was hired by American University (AU) (defendant) as an assistant professor on a tenure track. After three consecutive one-year appointments, AU learned that Morgan was a full-time professor at another university, a fact that he did not disclose during his appointment process. Morgan’s one-year contract was immediately rescinded. AU did not conduct a hearing as required by § 19 of the faculty manual, which provided that adequate cause had to be shown if a faculty member was terminated before the end of his or her contract. The faculty manual defined adequate cause as something related to a professor’s fitness or performance. Morgan filed a breach-of-contract claim against AU, contending that AU was required to afford him a hearing, as required by his contract. AU argued that it had the right to rescind his contract because Morgan made a material misrepresentation prior to its formation. A jury returned a verdict for AU, finding that AU had shown that it had a right to rescind the contract and, therefore, Morgan was not entitled to any protections afforded by his contract. Morgan filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which was denied. Morgan then appealed, arguing that, as a matter of law, the contract language, which included § 19 of the faculty manual, was unambiguous and afforded him the right to a hearing.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Steadman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 964,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,500 briefs, keyed to 1,006 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
- AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New
Understand your casebook readings in seconds
Use our case briefs to comprehend your casebook readings faster, supplement your notes and outlines, and outshine your peers in class.
Get instant access to over 47,500+ expert-written case briefs in a searchable database keyed to 1,006 law school casebooks.
