Sci. Ctr. at Houston v. Babb, 646 S.W.2d 502, 506 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1982, no writ). However, other cases have distinguished the holding in Babb, observing that the school catalog in that case contained an express statement allowing a student who began under the terms of a certain catalog to continue the program under that same catalog. See Southwell v. University of Incarnate Word, 974 S.W.2d 351, 355-56 (Tex.App.San Antonio 1998, pet. denied); Tobias v. University of Tex. at Arlington, 824 S.W.2d 201, 211 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1991, writ denied); Eiland, 764 S.W.2d at 838. However, where there is an express disclaimer negating any intent by the school to be bound by the terms of its catalog or handbook, no enforceable contract exists. See Southwell, 974 S.W.2d at 355-56 (<HOLDING>); Tobias, 824 S.W.2d at 211 (holding that where
holding public bodies may not be bound by contracts without evidence of the contract terms in the minutes holding that school bulletin did not create contract where it stated this bulletin is for informational purposes only the college reserves the right to change or alter any statement herein without prior notice signifying lack of intent by incarnate word to be bound by terms of bulletin holding federal court is not bound by terms of plea agreement between defendant and state authorities holding that plaintiff stated a claim for breach of contract when it alleged the government failed to purchase insurance for plaintiff as agreed by contract holding that where catalog contained express notice that the provisions of this catalog are subject to change without notice and do not constitute an irrevocable contract between any student  and the university of texas medical school at galveston no enforceable contract existed because express language negated any intent by school to be bound