Cases & Developments

Opinion affirming dismissal and certifying a question to the Florida Supreme Court. Plaintiffs, two students at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) during the Spring 2020 semester, on behalf of themselves and a putative class, brought contract and unjust enrichment claims against the FAU Board of Trustees after FAU ceased in-person instruction and closed campus facilities due to the coronavirus pandemic. In affirming dismissal, the Florida Court of Appeals held that (1) plaintiffs failed to show that their express written contract with FAU offered them anything more than the ability to register for classes and (2) accordingly, enforcement of any other implied promises or expectations was barred by sovereign immunity. Noting similar lawsuits across the State, the court also certified the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: “Whether sovereign immunity bars a breach of contract claim against a state university based on the university’s failure to provide its students with access to on-campus services and facilities?”  

Opinion affirming dismissal. Plaintiffs, four students at the University of Cincinnati, asserting multiple state-law claims, sought declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to the University’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate and its masking, testing, and quarantine policies. In affirming dismissal, the Court of Appeals of Ohio held that plaintiffs lacked standing because they neither demonstrated actual injury nor significant possibility of future harm. It noted, in particular, that (1) all plaintiffs received either an exemption to the vaccine mandate or at least one dose of a vaccine and (2) no plaintiff identified facts to show injury from the masking, testing, or quarantine policies. It further noted that the quarantine policy contained no enforcement mechanism. Finding no injury, the court did not reach the trial court’s holding that plaintiffs’ claims are also moot due to the University’s revocation of the challenged policies.  

Opinion vacating class certification and remanding.  Plaintiff, a student at Bradley University in Spring 2020, on behalf of himself and a putative class, brought contract and unjust enrichment claims against the University after it ceased in-person instruction and closed campus facilities due to the coronavirus pandemic.  The district court certified one class for claims related to tuition and one class for claims related to an activities’ fee.  In vacating class certification, the Seventh Circuit held the district court abused its discretion when it did not identify or analyze the elements of plaintiff’s claims as required to conduct a rigorous analysis of whether common questions predominated over individual claims.