parties for some mutually beneficial purpose. A license or permit does not have the elements of a contract. A license or permit is generally enforced through regulatory or criminal action; a contract is generally enforced through a suit for damages or specific performance. In view of these and other differences, courts routinely hold that a license or permit is merely the grant by the government of a privilege to the holder of the license or permit and does not constitute a contract. Outdoor Media, 554 So.2d at 615 (“A license is not a contract between the state and the licensee, but is a mere personal permit.” (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 829 (5th ed. 1979)); see also Lichterman v. Pickwick Pines Marina, Inc., No. 1:07CV256-SA-JAD, 2010 WL 1709980, at *2 (N.D.Miss. Apr. 23, 2010) (<HOLDING>); WMS Gaming, Inc. v. Sullivan, 6 A.3d 1104,
holding that permit issued pursuant to section 26a of the tennessee valley authority act was not a contract holding that denial of permit under section 404 of the clean water act was a taking holding that district court did not abuse its discretion for excluding experts supplement disclosure since rule 26a requires that the initial disclosures be complete and detailed holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur holding that for the government to be sued on a contract pursuant to the tucker act there must be privity of contract between the plaintiff and the united states