'Subpar in Every Aspect': Harvard Law Student Files Class Action Over Online Classes
Harvard Law School should not charge $65,875 for remote classes, an incoming 2L argues in a new lawsuit against the university.
June 23, 2020 at 03:08 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A Harvard Law student has filed a class action against the university, arguing that students should be charged a lower tuition for online classes on the grounds that they are inferior to in-person instruction.
Harvard is the latest target in a wave of litigation focused on college and university tuition reimbursements amid the COVID-19 pandemic—at least 100 campuses have been sued thus far. Plaintiffs firms Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, which is representing incoming second-year law student Abraham Barkhordar, has also filed suit against 13 other universities.
Barkhordar's complaint, which seeks to represent all Harvard students and not just those who attend the law school, takes issue not only with the fact that students were not issued tuition refunds last spring when classes shifted online, but also that the law school plans to keep tuition at the same level of $65,875 even though the fall semester will be entirely remote.
"While Plaintiff's coursework requires group projects and collaboration, such teamwork is now significantly harder to orchestrate," reads the complaint, filed June 22 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. "Plaintiff has also been unable to connect with professors and classmates on the same level online as he had in-person and is similarly lacking the intellectual stimulation of the in-person learning environment."
According to the complaint, Barkhordar's online courses in the spring were less rigorous than in-person classes and he had less interaction with his professors, whose expectations of students were lower.
A law school spokesman declined to comment on Barkhordar's suit and a Harvard representative said Tuesday that the university does not comment on pending litigation.
But the law school said on its website that the decision not to lower tuition for the fall was made by the central university administration, and that the law school was only permitted to cancel a planned tuition increase to keep it steady at the previous year's figure. It said that student tuition accounts for 42% of its revenue, with endowments, philanthropy, executive education, and rent from law school buildings making up the remainder. The school said it's projecting steep declines in those nontuition revenue sources, with little corresponding decline in its expenditures. (Faculty salaries are the single biggest cost driver for law schools, and Harvard Law has not announced plans to reduce the size of its faculty.)
Unlike most other universities that have thus far been sued by students over tuition for online classes, Harvard Law School and five other graduate schools at the university have announced that they will remain fully online for the 2020 fall semester. (Harvard is thus far the only law school to announce such a move for the upcoming semester.) That decision has not gone over well with everyone. More than 400 current students and Harvard Law alumni signed a petition asking the school to implement a hybrid model that would offer a mix of online and in-person courses.
Incoming and current law students were given several weeks to decide whether to defer their studies for a year. But Barkhordar's complaint argues that the choice between paying "outrageous tuition" for online classes and disrupting their education isn't much of a choice at all. The class action, which is seeking upward of $5 million for members, claims breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and conversion.
"Plaintiff and Class Members did not intend to attend an online educational institution, but instead enrolled in Defendant's institution on an in-person basis," the suit reads. "The online learning option Defendant offers is subpar in practically every aspect. The remote learning option is in no way the equivalent of the in-person education putative Class Members were promised when they committed to attend Harvard."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWith DEI Rollbacks, Employment Lawyers See Potential For Targeting Corporate Commitment to Equality
7 minute readMoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
Amid the Tragedy of the L.A. Fires, a Lesson on the Value of Good Neighbors
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 15th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
- 2Crocs Accused of Padding Revenue With Channel-Stuffing HEYDUDE Shoes
- 3E-discovery Practitioners Are Racing to Adapt to Social Media’s Evolving Landscape
- 4The Law Firm Disrupted: For Office Policies, Big Law Has Its Ear to the Market, Not to Trump
- 5FTC Finalizes Child Online Privacy Rule Updates, But Ferguson Eyes Further Changes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250