MEMORANDUM

            Plaintiff was a student in the practical nursing program at Name Deleted College.  He was dismissed from the Name Deleted Practical Nursing Program before he obtained his degree.  His Complaint consists of numerous disagreements he had with the way in which the program was administered, the professional judgment exercised by the instructors, and Defendant’s alleged failure to comply with published policies and procedures.  Plaintiff cites no specific cause of action or statue [sic] anywhere in his Complaint.

            Under Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure 12.02(e), Defendant moves for dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.  The issue is whether the complaint sets forth a legally sufficient claim for relief, which is a question of law.  Bodah v. Lakeville Motor Express, Inc., 663 N.W.2d 550, 553 (Minn. 2003).

            Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s lawsuit is a direct challenge to the professional educational judgment exercised by the Defendant and thus barred because Minnesota does not recognize a cause of action for educational malpractice.  The court in Alsides v. Brown Inst., Ltd., 592 N.W.2d 468 (Minn.App.1999), rejected a claim for educational malpractice, limiting actions against an educational institution to those alleging a failure to perform a specific promise made to the student and rejected those actions that required a court to inquire “into the nuances of educational processes and theories.”  Id. At 473 (citing Ryan v Univ of N.C. Hosps., 494 S.E.2d 789, 791 (1998)).  In this case, the Plaintiff as a former student, has brought a claim against Defendant based upon disagreements he had with the way in which the program was administered and the professional judgment exercised by the instructors.  Plaintiff’s Complaint also refers to alleged breaches of the Defendant’s policies and procedures.  These allegations may indicate a breach of contract claim.  However, Minnesota Courts have uniformity [sic] held that student handbooks or bulletins do not form a unilateral contract between the university ant the student requiring strict compliance.  See Rollins v. Cardinal Stritch University, 626 N.W.2d 464, 470 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001).  Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and Defendant’s motion to dismiss the Complaint must be granted.

            Judges Initials Deleted