Lawsuit Targets Columbia University for Tuition Refunds After COVID-19 Closure
The filing also claimed that Columbia's decision last month to move to a pass/fail grading system had diminished the value of the students' eventual degrees "for the rest of plaintiffs' life."
April 24, 2020 at 01:36 PM
4 minute read
A group of students has sued Columbia University for tuition refunds after the Ivy League school moved its classes online in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, claiming that they had been denied the hands-on learning experiences they paid for.
The proposed class-action lawsuit, filed late Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that students for the Spring 2020 academic semester at Columbia had been unable to obtain refunds after the school announced March 12 that all classes for the remainder of the term would be conducted online.
The filing also claimed that Columbia's decision last month to move to a pass/fail grading system had diminished the value of the students' eventual degrees "for the rest of plaintiffs' life."
"To date, defendant has failed and continues to fail to refund any portion of plaintiffs' and the putative class members' Spring 2020 tuition payment," Gainey McKenna & Egleston partner Thomas McKenna wrote in a 10-page complaint.
"Moreover, plaintiffs and members of the putative class have been and will be deprived of fully utilizing services for which they have already paid, including, but not limited to, access to campus facilities and other opportunities," he said.
The complaint was the second Thursday to target the university for tuition reimbursements over decisions it made in coping with the novel coronavirus outbreak, and it was the latest in a flurry of litigation against universities, gyms, airlines and theme parks for failure to refund consumers after closures as a result of COVID-19.
Another lawsuit, filed by Toptani Law and the Anastopoulo Law Firm in the Southern District of New York, took aim at Columbia's board of trustees, claiming that students should also be compensated for losing access to other on-campus services, like the university health facilities, residence halls and activities.
"While closing campus and transitioning to online classes was the right thing for defendant to do, this decision deprived plaintiff and the other members of the class from recognizing the benefits of in-person instruction, access to campus facilities, student activities and other benefits and services in exchange for which they had already paid fees and tuition," that suit said.
New York University and Pace University in Lower Manhattan also faced similar lawsuits from students, who have sued over being denied tuition reimbursements.
McKenna said in his filing that tuition and fees for in-person learning accounted for face-to-face interactions with professors, mentors and peers, as well as access to university computer labs, study rooms, laboratories and libraries. Students, he said, were also missing out on networking, extracurriculars and social development opportunities that are reflected in typical tuition prices.
The two-count lawsuit, which has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Valerie E. Caproni of the Southern District of New York, alleges breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
Columbia University's press shop did not immediately respond to an email Friday seeking comment on the filings.
Sign up for Law.com's Legal Radar to keep up with the latest news and lawsuits in a free, personalized news feed. Track new federal litigation by industry, practice area, law firm, company and region.
Read More:
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
© 2024 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 All'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute read'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readLippman Study on Antisemitism at CUNY Weighs Free Speech, Unprotected Acts
'Illegal Conspiracy'?: EDNY Antitrust Class Action Challenges Publishers' 'Unpaid Peer Review Rule'
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome', DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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