R. C. A. WAHLBERG, AND ALYCE M. WAHLBERG, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
MIAMI MILITARY ACADEMY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Parents sued a military academy for refusing to refund advance tuition after their stepson withdrew after two weeks of a semester-long enrollment. The trial court granted summary judgment for the academy based on a no-refund clause in the admission application, but the appellate court reversed, finding a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the student's departure constituted a withdrawal or dismissal under the contract terms.
The appellate court reversed the summary judgment because a genuine issue of material fact remained to be decided: whether the facts and circumstances surrounding the enrollee's leaving constituted a withdrawal or dismissal prior to the expiration of the agreed enrollment period as contemplated by the admission application's refund clause.
“We cannot agree with the decision of the trial court in that the record presents a genuine issue of material fact remaining to be decided, to-wit: whether the facts and circumstances surrounding the enrollee's leaving of the academy constituted a withdrawal or dismissal prior to the expiration of the agreed enrollment period”
The court's primary holding that summary judgment was improper because material factual disputes existed about whether the student withdrew or was dismissed.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Wahlbergs paid advance tuition for their stepson to attend Miami Military Academy for a full semester. After approximately two weeks, the student …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rescission Of Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellants were the plaintiffs below, having filed their suit against the appellee institution based on the recision of a contract. The theory underlying the plaintiffs’ cause of action was that they had paid advance tuition for a full semester of education and training for their step-son; through no fault of their own, their stepson left the institution after having received approximately two weeks’ education. Upon demand, the appellee refused to return any part of the advance tuition. The appellee thereafter moved for the summary judgment, filing an affidavit in support thereof, along with copies of the written application for admission executed by appellant R. C. A. Wahlberg. In that application, there was contained the following provision:
“I Agree:
'To make no claim for the refund of any portion of the fees paid, or release from fees due, if the student is either withdrawn or dismissed prior to the expiration of the agreed enrollment period, and that any and all funds that have been paid are to be retained by the Academy as liquidated damages unless due to illness lasting longer than 30 consecutive days, certified to by the school doctor, in which case a 50% pro rata discount is allowed for the time out for said disability.”
The appellants filed their affidavit in opposition to the appellee’s motion for summary judgment, containing allegations by the student himself, which essentially stated, first, his dissatisfaction with the physical premises, the teaching and supervisory staff, his classmates, and other matters of a nature pertaining to his disappointment with various aspects of the academy. Secondly, the affidavit in opposition went on to state that, because of the reasons enumerated by the affiant, he refused to go back to the academy even though ordered to do so by his mother, and continued to so refuse to return to the academy even after his mother’s further insistence on such return.
Upon the basis of the affidavits before him, the trial judge granted the appellee’s motion for final summary judgment. We cannot agree with the decision of the trial court in that the record presents a genuine issue of material fact remaining to be decided, to-wit: whether the facts and circumstances surrounding the enrollee’s leaving of the academy constituted a withdrawal or dismissal prior to the expiration of the agreed enrollment period, pursuant to the proviso, supra, contained in the application for admission.
Therefore, the final summary judgment being appealed is hereby reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.