FILTERS
- Age Discrimination
- Disability Discrimination
- Diversity in Employment
- Diversity in the General Counsel’s Office
- Enforcement of Non-Discrimination Laws
- Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Gender Identity & Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA)
- Race and National Origin Discrimination
- Religious Discrimination & Accommodation
- Retaliation
- Sex Discrimination
- Veterans Discrimination
- Academic Freedom & Employee Speech
- Background Checks & Employee Verification
- Collective Bargaining
- Diversity in Employment
- Employee Benefits
- Employee Discipline & Due Process
- Employee Sexual Misconduct
- Employment of Foreign Nationals
- Employment Separation, RIFs, ERIPs & Retrenchment
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) & Categorization of Employees
- Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Intellectual Property
- Reproductive Health Issues
- Research
- Retaliation
- Tenure
- Veterans & Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Diversity in the General Counsel’s Office
- Ethical Obligations of Higher Education Lawyers
- Evaluation of Operations & Staff in the General Counsel’s Office
- External Counsel
- Law Office Management
- Law Office Technology
- Law Office Training
- Roles & Responsibilities of the General Counsel
- Wellness & Stress Management
- Academic Performance and Misconduct
- Admissions
- Distressed & Suicidal Students
- Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans
- Hazing
- Internships, Externships, & Clinical Work
- Student Athlete Issues
- Student Conduct
- Student Housing
- Student Organizations
- Student Speech & Campus Unrest
- Title IX & Student Sexual Misconduct
- Uncategorized
Latest Cases & Developments
Date:
Little v. Grand Canyon Univ. (D. Ariz. Aug. 21, 2023)
Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, a student at Grand Canyon University (GCU) during spring 2020, brought contract and unjust enrichment claims against the University after it ceased in-person instruction and closed campus facilities due to the coronavirus pandemic. With respect to his contract claims, the court previously certified one class for those who paid room and board and one for those who paid other fees, but it denied class certification for his unjust enrichment claims. The court granted summary judgment to GCU on the room and board claims, finding no genuine dispute of material fact as to whether GCU breached its contractual obligations because GCU continued to permit students to live on campus, continued to provide take-out meals, and refunded unused “Dining Dollars” to students who graduated. Turning to the contract claims related to other fees, however, the court permitted plaintiff to proceed with respect to the Student Activity Fee and the Health Fee, finding disputes as to whether GCU continued to provide access to facilities and activities and a dispute as to whether the telehealth services it offered were available to students living outside of Arizona. The court granted summary judgment to GCU on plaintiff’s unjust enrichment claims, finding that all damages sought derived from contractual rights and obligations.
Topics:
Campus Police, Safety, & Crisis Management | Coronavirus
NACUA Annual Conference
Join us in the Music City June 29 – July 2 to connect, learn, and lead alongside higher education attorneys shaping policy, practice, and impact nationwide together.