Tercier v. University of Miami, Inc.
A dismissed nursing student sued the University of Miami for breach of contract and negligent supervision based on alleged discriminatory treatment by faculty. The Third DCA affirmed dismissal with prejudice, holding for the first time in Florida that broad, general policy statements in a university student handbook (e.g., 'the right to be educated and nurtured') are too indefinite to support a breach of contract claim, and that a negligent retention/supervision claim requires an underlying intentional tort by the employee committed outside the scope of employment. The court also rejected a Perlow challenge to the trial court's verbatim adoption of the university's proposed dismissal order three hours after submission.
Key facts
- Nursing student dismissed from University of Miami sued for breach of contract and negligent supervision, alleging discriminatory treatment by faculty members.
- Trial court dismissed the complaint with prejudice based on the university's motion; student appealed to the Third District Court of Appeal.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is the first Florida appellate decision to squarely hold that general aspirational policy statements in a university student handbook cannot support a breach of contract claim, adopting persuasive federal authority… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.