The high school phenom said Duke University’s coach promised him a chance to compete against the nation’s top college golfers – and lifetime access to state-of-the-art training facilities.

Hoping eventually to turn pro, the recruit accepted the invitation. But when the coach died, his replacement dismissed him from the team and told him he couldn’t use the school’s golf facilities.

Was the university on the hook for breach of contract? The recruit said it was, relying on a student-athlete handbook and an athletic department policy manual.

But the court said no enforceable contract was created. The recruit wasn’t a scholarship athlete, and he never signed a letter of intent. Student policy manuals don’t create binding contracts, especially since they can be changed unilaterally at any time, the court explained.

Cite: Giuliani v. Duke Univ.

Did the court get this one right? Tell us what you think and why in the comments section below.