Summary
This New York Appellate Division decision addresses a student's lawsuit against Canisius College seeking tuition and fee refunds after the college transitioned to remote learning during the spring 2020 semester due to the pandemic. The court reviewed a motion to dismiss claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, ultimately affirming the lower court's dismissal of the tuition-related breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims while allowing the mandatory fees claim to proceed. The majority held that the complaint lacked specific promises of exclusively in-person instruction, while dissenting judges argued the allegations were sufficient to survive dismissal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the amended complaint states a cause of action for breach of contract as to tuition when the college ceased in‑person instruction.
- Whether the amended complaint states a cause of action for unjust enrichment based on the college’s alleged receipt of tuition and fees without providing in‑person services.
- Whether the breach‑of‑contract claim as to mandatory fees should be dismissed.
Holdings
- The complaint fails to state a cause of action for breach of contract as to tuition because it does not allege a specific promise to provide exclusively in‑person learning.
- The complaint does not state a cause of action for unjust enrichment because it fails to allege that the college was enriched at the plaintiff’s expense.
- The breach‑of‑contract claim as to mandatory fees is not dismissed because the complaint alleges that certain fees are tied to services that can only be provided in‑person.
Key quotations
“On a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211, the pleading is to be afforded a liberal construction ... and determine only whether the facts alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory.”
“Where, as here, the existence of a controlling contract between the parties has not been conceded by the parties or determined by the motion court, the assertion of a cause of action for breach of contract does not preclude a plaintiff from asserting in the alternative a cause of action for unjust enrichment.”
Factual background
In spring 2020 Canisius College suspended all in‑person classes and moved to remote instruction. The plaintiff, an undergraduate, paid tuition and mandatory fees for the spring semester and sued seeking recovery of those amounts, asserting breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and conversion. The complaint alleged that the college’s marketing promised in‑person education and that the shift to remote learning deprived the plaintiff of that benefit.
Procedural history
The plaintiff filed an action alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and conversion after Canisius College shifted to remote instruction in spring 2020. The trial court dismissed the breach‑of‑contract claim as to tuition and the unjust‑enrichment claim, while denying dismissal of the breach‑of‑contract claim as to mandatory fees. The parties appealed the respective portions of that order.