Court Rejects Coach's Fraud Claim as an Artful Alternative to Collect on an Unenforceable Contract

Contract Damages Barred by Statute of Frauds; Fraud Theory Fails Because if Was Used as a Creative Alternative to Circumvent the Statute of Frauds and Collect the Same Damages

In this employment dispute the Supreme Court holds that a volleyball coach could not pursue a fraud claim as an alternative theory of recovery where his breach of contract claim was barred, and the damages he sought were the same. In a prior appeal the reviewing court had held that Sonnichson's breach-of-contract claim based on an oral promise to enter into a contract that could not be performed within one year was precluded by the statute of frauds. Although a written draft contract surfaced in the course of discovery, it had never been delivered, thus defeating the mutual assent element required for a binding written contract. The Supreme Court also holds that the trial court properly denied an opportunity to amend after sustaining special exceptions, and properly granted summary judgment for the university, because the defect in Plaintiff's cause was incurable. The Court renders judgment that the coach take nothing.

Baylor Univ. v. Sonnichsen, No. 04-0851 (Tex. Apr. 20, 2007)(per curiam)

Find terms: employment contracts, wrongful termination, measure of damages