Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.
Sign up for our Class Action newsletter
You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:
Thank You!
Law360 (October 21, 2020, 9:58 PM EDT) -- DePaul University has asked an Illinois federal court to toss a proposed class action by students seeking refunds of fees and tuition in light of the school's move to remote classes during the COVID-19 pandemic, arguing the case amounts to impermissible "educational malpractice" claims.
In a motion to dismiss filed Tuesday in the Northern District of Illinois, the private Catholic university based in Chicago argued that the Seventh Circuit and other courts have established "overwhelming precedent foreclosing educational malpractice actions." Courts are unwilling to wade into educational malpractice issues because there is no standard of care by which to evaluate educators, the university said.
The proposed class action, filed in June, also asserts breach of contract claims against the university for not providing allegedly promised in-person classes, but DePaul said it has no such contractual responsibility.
"While plaintiffs' frustration with changes necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic is understandable, their legal claims fail for several reasons," the university said.
DePaul halted in-person classes on March 11 and offered students three options for the spring 2020 quarter: take a leave of absence, forgo the quarter and receive a full refund, or proceed with remote classes, the university said.
But now, members of the proposed class — such as named plaintiff Alhix Oyoque, who took remote classes and graduated in the spring — are seeking refunds, DePaul said.
Oyoque claims the university owes her $3,800 in tuition for the spring quarter, but she hasn't received a refund yet. Her claims are based on arguments that the online classes offered to students during the public health crisis were "subpar in practically every aspect."
She and other members of the proposed class didn't choose to attend an online institution of higher learning; they chose to enroll on an in-person basis. And DePaul markets its on-campus experience as a benefit of enrollment on its website, according to the complaint.
DePaul contends in its motion Tuesday that it maintains discretion over academic affairs and never made a contractual promise to provide an in-person education under all circumstances. The university was forced to make what it thought was the right decision, it said.
"Its hands tied, DePaul, like many other universities, implemented remote learning because it was the only viable solution for the continuation of educational services in a safe manner," the university said.
The proposed class action includes claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment and conversion. Oyoque is seeking to represent a class of all students who paid DePaul's spring 2020 term tuition whose tuition and fees haven't been refunded.
Oyoque and the proposed class are represented by Carl V. Malmstrom of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLC, and L. Timothy Fisher, Neal J. Deckant and Sarah N. Westcot of Bursor & Fisher PA.
DePaul is represented by Daniel M. Blouin and Jaime R. Simon of Winston & Strawn LLP.
The case is Oyoque et al. v. DePaul University et al., case number 1:20-cv-03431, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
--Additional reporting by Celeste Bott. Editing by Adam LoBelia.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
