Miranda v. Xavier University

• Decision Date: 28 March 2022
• Docket Number: Case No. 1:20-cv-539
• Citation: 594 F.Supp.3d 961
• Parties: Ximena MIRANDA, Plaintiff, v. XAVIER UNIVERSITY, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Ohio

594 F.Supp.3d 961

Ximena MIRANDA, Plaintiff,

v.XAVIER UNIVERSITY, Defendant.

Case No. 1:20-cv-539

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division.

Signed March 28, 2022

Joseph Michael Lyon, The Lyon Firm, Cincinnati, OH, Terence Richard Coates, Wilbert Benjamin Markovits, Markovits, Stock & DeMarco, LLC, Cincinnati, OH, Zachary C. Schaengold, Baron & Budd, P.C., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff.

Aaron Mark Herzig, David Paul Dornette, Medora Akers, Russell S. Sayre, Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, Cincinnati, OH, for Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

Timothy S. Black, United States District Judge

This putative class action is before the Court on Defendant's motion to dismiss (Docs. 10, 13), and the parties’ responsive memoranda (Docs. 15, 17).

I. FACTS AS ALLEGED BY PLAINTIFF

This case is one of many around the country between a university and its students following the global and unprecedented upheaval of the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020, American colleges and universities scrambled to meet the challenge of a highly contagious, often deadly virus. To protect their communities’ health and comply with emergency shelter-in-place orders, colleges shuttered dormitories, lecture halls, arenas, libraries, and laboratories. As campuses ground to a halt, their administrations deployed heroic efforts to continue educating students. Within weeks, resilient students and faculty carried on with the business of education through web platforms like Zoom and WebEx.

The seismic shift to online learning was a modern miracle, unimagined even ten years ago. But for students, many of whom took on life-changing debt to buy the full in-person experience, it was a tragedy. They felt justifiably robbed of in-person opportunities to meet friends, build professional networks, and practice practical job skills. None were affected more so than professional students seeking to enter especially hands-on fields like healthcare.

Ximena Miranda ("Plaintiff") was one of those students.¹ Like most prospective matriculants, Plaintiff reviewed Xavier's website and spoke with a Xavier admissions counselor about Xavier University's College of Nursing Accelerated Bachelor of Science in Nursing ("ABSN") program. According to them, the program would provide "a fast-paced sequence of online and on-site curriculum over four, full-time semesters."² Plaintiff was especially drawn to Xavier's clinical and simulation lab experiences, as well as the "guarantee" of "placement in a quality clinical environment."³ Xavier heavily emphasized the importance of these experiences, and still does today. The ABSN website told applicants "that it is impossible to earn a BSN 100% online. As an ABSN student, you'll regularly attend hands-on skills labs at the ABSN Learning Center."⁴ The website's language has not changed since 2020.

In January 2020, Miranda ("Plaintiff") enrolled in the ABSN program. The cost of attendance was $13,500 in tuition per semester, plus an $18 per semester professional liability fee, an annual $115 student activity fee, and other fees not relevant here. The student activity fee, according to Xavier, is "charged to every full-time and part-time undergraduate or graduate student whether or not they are on campus or studying abroad." It pays for the Student Government Association and all organizations under it, including:

over 100 on- and off-campus opportunities for students annually, over 120 clubs, and 6 subordinate bodies (including Club Sports Council, the National Pan-Hellenic Council and Resident Student Association). Other initiatives sponsored by the SGA include the free Legal Counsel for all enrolled students, a Campus Readership Program that provides free USA Today and New York Times, the Commuter Council, the Commuter Lounge in the Gallagher Student Center (GSC), and a computer kiosk for quick printing in the GSC.⁵

The professional liability fee was explained in Plaintiff's Undergraduate Nursing Student Handbook ("the Handbook") for 2019-2020. (Doc. 13-1). According to the Handbook, the professional liability fee provides nursing students professional liability insurance coverage while they participate in Xavier's clinics. Id. at 43.

The Handbook also outlines many other facets of the ABSN program and requires signatures indicating students’ assent to its terms. Id. at 8. For instance, the Handbook provides a code of conduct governing students’ behavior when interacting with patients. Id. at 17-24. The Handbook describes the university's policies about reporting communicable diseases. Id. at 26. It sets "expectations" for students, reminding them that "[c]linical and lab attendance is mandatory ," and that missing clinics and labs "may impact the student's ability to meet course objectives and may result in course failure." Id. at 32-33 (emphasis in original). And it contains the "Policy and Procedure" for Xavier's "Clinical Simulation and Skills Labs" which tells students they "will spend time in the Nursing Skills & Simulation Labs each semester," id. at 35-46, requires them to submit to health screenings, id. at 43-44, and prescribes required uniforms, id. at 46.

By Plaintiff's first day of school, she had read—and, in some cases, signed—dozens of pages preparing her for an in-person learning experience. Xavier abandoned all of it when the pandemic hit Ohio. The entire ABSN program moved online. Simulation labs and clinical placements were cancelled. ABSN students did not, however, receive any refunds of tuition, student activity fees, or the professional liability fee.

On July 10, 2020, Plaintiff sued on behalf of herself and a putative class of all other ABSN students who did not receive in-person instruction. (Doc. 1). She brings claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, and, in an amended complaint, a claim under the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act, O.R.C. § 1345.01 et seq. (Doc. 11).

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

A motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) operates to test the sufficiency of the complaint and permits dismissal of a complaint for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." To show grounds for relief, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) requires that the complaint contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief."

While Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 "does not require ‘detailed factual allegations,’ ... it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) ). Pleadings offering mere " ‘labels and conclusions’ or ‘a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.’ " Id. (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955 ). In fact, in determining a motion to dismiss, "courts ‘are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation.’ " Twombly , 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (quoting Papasan v. Allain , 478 U.S. 265, 286, 106 S.Ct. 2932, 92 L.Ed.2d 209 (1986) ). Further, "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Id.

Accordingly, "[t]o survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ " Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955 ). A claim is plausible where a "plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Id. Plausibility "is not akin to a ‘probability requirement,’ but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully." Id. "[W]here the well-pleaded facts do not permit the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct, the complaint has alleged—but it has not ‘show[n]’—‘that the pleader is entitled to relief,’ " and the case shall be dismissed. Id. at 679, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) ).

III. ANALYSIS

Xavier seeks to dismiss all of Plaintiff's claims. The Court considers each in turn.

A. Breach of contract

Plaintiff's first claim is that Xavier breached its contract with her by cancelling all in-person instruction. To establish a claim for breach of contract under Ohio law, a Plaintiff must show (1) the formation of a binding contract or agreement; (2) the nonbreaching party performed its obligations under the contract; (3) the defendant failed to fulfill its obligations without a legally valid excuse; and (4) the nonbreaching party suffered damages. Capital Equity Grp. v. Ripken Sports Inc. , 744 F. Appx 260, 262–63 (6th Cir. 2018), citing Carbone v. Nueva Constr. Grp., LLC , 2017-Ohio-382, 83 N.E.3d 375, ¶ 14 (8th Dist.). Xavier does not contest that Plaintiff performed her obligations under the contract. Xavier attacks the sufficiency of the first, third, and fourth elements.

First, Xavier argues that the Handbook was its entire contract with Plaintiff and argues that Plaintiff cannot allege the formation of a binding agreement beyond the four corners of the Handbook.

Ohio law recognizes three types of contracts: express, implied in fact, and implied in law. Union Sav. Bank v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp. , 191 Ohio App.3d 540, 2010-Ohio-6396, 946 N.E.2d 835, 841 (10th Dist.). "While both express and implied contracts require the showing of an agreement based on a meeting of the minds and mutual assent, the manner in which these requirements are proven varies depending upon the nature of the contract.’ " Reali, Giampetro & Scott v. Soc. Nat'l. Bank , 133 Ohio App.3d 844, 849, 729 N.E.2d 1259, 1263 (7th Dist.1999). "In an express contract, the assent to the terms of the contract is formally expressed in the offer and acceptance of the parties." Id. There is no such...