Salerno v. Fla. S. Coll.

• Decision Date: 16 September 2020
• Docket Number: Case No. 8:20-cv-1494-30SPF
• Citation: 488 F.Supp.3d 1211
• Parties: Sara SALERNO and Lindsay Murillo, Plaintiffs, v. FLORIDA SOUTHERN COLLEGE, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida

488 F.Supp.3d 1211

Sara SALERNO and Lindsay Murillo, Plaintiffs,

v.FLORIDA SOUTHERN COLLEGE, Defendant.

Case No. 8:20-cv-1494-30SPF

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division.

Signed September 16, 2020

Sarah Westcot, Bursor & Fisher, P.A., Miami, FL, Max Stuart Roberts, Bursor & Fisher, P.A., New York, NY, for Plaintiffs.

Elizabeth Anne Morris, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY, Robert Eugene Puterbaugh, Stephen R. Senn, Peterson & Myers, PA, Lakeland, FL, for Defendant.

ORDER

JAMES S. MOODY, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant Florida Southern College's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 34) and Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition (Dkt. 43). The Court, upon review of the motion, response, and being otherwise advised in the premises, concludes that the motion should be granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the Court agrees that Plaintiff Sara Salerno lacks standing to assert the legal claims because she was not a student of Defendant Florida Southern College. The Court also agrees that the conversion claim fails to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). Defendant's arguments with respect to Plaintiff Lindsay Murillo's breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims are unavailing at this motion to dismiss stage because she has adequately pled these claims.

BACKGROUND

The Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 ("COVID-19") pandemic has wreaked havoc on the world. In the Spring of 2020, many schools and colleges, both public and private, were forced to move their curriculum from in-person to online instruction out of concern for the health of their students, faculty, and staff, and in response to government-mandated closures and social-distancing measures.

Plaintiffs Lindsay Murillo and her mother, Sara Salerno, bring this action on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly-situated students, contending that Defendant Florida Southern College breached its contract with its students because that contract included the promise to provide in-person educational services. The damages flowing from this alleged breach? Tuition reimbursement.

This case is novel in the sense that there is no legal precedent involving a pandemic's impact on a school's promise to provide in-person learning when doing so would be unsafe and/or against government mandates. And so, like the ripple in a pond after one throws a stone, the legal system is now feeling COVID-19's havoc with the current wave of class action lawsuits that seek tuition reimbursement related to forced online tutelage. As explained further below, Florida law recognizes that a college has a contractual relationship with its students. Murillo, a student, has alleged the elements of a breach of contract claim against Florida Southern College in her amended complaint. At this early stage in the case, that is all that is necessary. The more difficult issues will come later, at the summary judgment stage. The Court now turns to the specific facts alleged in the amended complaint, which the Court must accept as true at this stage. (Dkt. 32).

The amended complaint states that it is a class action lawsuit¹ on behalf of all people who paid tuition and fees for the Spring 2020 academic semester at Florida Southern College, and who lost the benefit of the educational services that they contracted and paid for as a result of Florida Southern College's response to COVID-19.

Florida Southern College (the "College") is a private college with an enrollment of over 3,000 students. The College offers 50 undergraduate majors and pre-professional programs, graduate programs in nursing, business, and education, and post-graduate programs in nursing, education, and physical therapy. It has been named among the most beautiful college campuses in the country.

Plaintiffs and Florida Southern College "entered into a contractual agreement where Plaintiffs would provide payment in the form of tuition and fees and Defendant, in exchange, would provide in-person educational services, experiences, opportunities, and other related services." (Dkt. 32 at ¶3). The terms of the contractual agreement were set forth in Florida Southern College's publications, including the Spring 2020 Semester Course Portal ("Course Portal"). The Course Portal is directed at students and provides information about the courses offered, including the instructors, the days and times, and the location (including the building and room number).

Other publications refer to the in-person nature of the Spring 2020 semester course offerings, including course specific syllabi, and the Florida Southern College Academic Catalog 2019/2020 ("Academic Catalog"). The Academic Catalog details the policies, procedures, and expectations expected of the students. The Academic Catalog emphasizes that "[c]lass attendance [and] participation in engaged learning activities ... are essential college requirements." Id. at ¶7. The Academic Catalog likewise notes that "[s]tudents are expected to attend all class and laboratory sessions on time and should be absent only for unavoidable documented reasons." Id. In addition, the Academic Catalog highlights the on-campus facilities, such as the Roux Library (described as an "integral part of the intellectual life of the College"), Tûtû’s Cyber Café (which "contributes to the educational and social fabric of the campus"), the Rinker Technology Center, and the Nina B. Hollis Wellness Center. Id. at ¶8.

Florida Southern College's Spring 2020 semester commenced on or around January 6, 2020, and concluded on or around April 29, 2020. On March 12, 2020, Florida Southern College announced that because of the global COVID-19 pandemic, in-person classes would be suspended on March 13, 2020, for ten days, with classes to resume online on March 23, 2020. Florida Southern College advised students to leave campus and return home. It anticipated that in-person classes would resume on April 15, 2020.

On March 18, 2020, the College's President, Anne B. Kerr, announced in a campus-wide email that the College would "proceed with offering remote instruction for the remainder of the semester. Thus, students will not return to campus, as [ ] first planned, for classes to resume face-to-face on April 15th." The email also announced the decision to "close campus buildings[ ] ... and cancel May graduation." Id. at ¶11.

Florida Southern College did not hold any in-person classes from March 12, 2020, through the end of the Spring 2020 semester. Classes that continued after March 12, 2020, were provided in an online format, with no in-person instruction. No classes were held (either in-person or online) from March 13, 2020, through March 23, 2020.

Plaintiffs allege that: "As a result of the closure of Defendant's facilities, Defendant did not deliver the educational services, facilities, access and/or opportunities that Plaintiffs and the putative Class contracted and paid for. The online learning options being offered to [the College's] students were subpar in practically every aspect, from the lack of facilities, materials, and access to faculty. Students were deprived of the opportunity for collaborative learning and in-person dialogue, feedback, and critique. The remote learning options were in no way the equivalent of the in-person education that Plaintiffs and the putative class members contracted and paid for." Id. at ¶13.

With respect to Plaintiff Lindsay Murillo, she is an undergraduate student at Florida Southern College pursuing a bachelor's degree in biology. She avers that the biology program relies extensively on in-person instruction, lab work, and access to facilities. None of the abovementioned resources were available to her while in-person classes were suspended. Murillo paid approximately $18,430 in tuition, a $315 technology fee, and a $75 activity fee for the Spring 2020 semester. Murillo claims Florida Southern College failed to refund any of these fees, despite the fact that all students were required to leave campus on March 13, 2020.

The amended complaint alleges three claims: breach of contract; unjust enrichment; and conversion (Counts I-III respectively). Now, Florida Southern College moves to dismiss for various grounds, including Plaintiff Salerno's lack of standing under Rule 12(b)(1) and failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court turns to standing first, which is a question of subject matter jurisdiction and therefore a threshold issue. The Court will then discuss whether the claims are adequately pled.

DISCUSSION

I. Standing

To bring a suit in federal court, a party must meet the standing requirements of Article III of the Constitution. Standing "limits the category of litigants empowered to maintain a lawsuit in federal court to seek redress for a legal wrong." Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins , ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S. Ct. 1540, 1547, 194 L.Ed.2d 635 (2016). The "irreducible constitutional minimum" of standing consists of three elements.

Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife , 504 U.S. 555, 560, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). "The plaintiff must have (1) suffered an injury in fact, (2) that is fairly traceable to the challenged conduct of the defendant, and (3) that is likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision." Spokeo , 136 S.Ct. at 1547. "The plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears the burden of establishing these elements." Id.

Because standing is jurisdictional, a defendant can move to dismiss a complaint for lack of standing under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Stalley ex rel. U.S. v. Orlando Reg'l Healthcare Sys., Inc. , 524 F.3d 1229, 1232 (11th Cir. 2008). "A defendant can move to dismiss a complaint under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction by either facial or factual attack." Id. "A facial attack on the complaint requires the court merely to look and see if the plaintiff has sufficiently alleged a basis for subject matter...