Duane Morris Class Action Review - 2023 - Report - Page 340
the fiduciary to the Polk-related trusts of certain plaintiff class members. The court
therefore granted the plaintiff’s motion for class certification, in part.
Florida
Similar to the other COVID-related cases discussed in this section, Florida is another
state where the courts were disinclined to allow plaintiffs to proceed on a class-wide
basis on claims related to the pandemic.
In University Of Florida Board Of Trustees v. Rojas, et al., 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 8060
(Fl. Dist. Ct. App. Nov. 22, 2022), the plaintiff, a graduate student, filed a class action
asserting claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment related to paid fees not
refunded following the campus shut-down due to COVID-19. To support the breach of
contract claim, the plaintiff filed a copy of the University’s financial liability agreement;
an estimate of tuition and fees for the 2019-2020 academic year; and the plaintiff’s
tuition statement showing he paid his tuition and fees for the Spring 2020 semester. Id.
at *2-3. The complaint also cited to various university webpages that contained general
statements or descriptions of various campus amenities. The plaintiff, on behalf of a
class of similarly-situated students, asserted that these documents, in the aggregate,
made up an express written contract between him and the university for specific oncampus resources and services during the relevant time period. The trial court
dismissed the unjust enrichment claim, but allowed the contract claim to move forward.
Id. at *3. The Florida court of appeal disagreed. It ruled that the “hodge-podge” of
documents did not constitute an express written contract sufficient to overcome
sovereign immunity enjoyed by the university. Id. at *5. The court of appeal further
found that the liability agreement merely conditioned a student’s right to enroll upon the
agreement to pay tuition and fees, and although the agreement mentioned the provision
of “educational services,” that general phrase fell far short of conveying an express
promise by the university to provide in-person or on-campus services to a student at
any specific time. Id. at *6. For these reasons, the court of appeal reversed and
remanded to the trial court for entry of judgment in favor of the university on the basis
that sovereign immunity barred the action.
Conversely, in Concert Plantation v. Dorso, et al., 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 8603 (Fla. Dist.
Ct. App. Dec. 5, 2022), the plaintiffs, approximately 750 equity members of the
defendant, a country club, brought a class action lawsuit seeking a refund of a portion of
their membership fees. Id. at *1. The trial court granted class certification and a divided
court of appeal affirmed on the basis that the issue of when a member's right to a refund
vested and whether a member was entitled to a refund met the commonality and
predominance requirements. Id. at *2. Although the defendants raised a number of
affirmative defenses that might ultimately preclude relief for some of the plaintiffs, the
court of appeal held that the existence of affirmative defenses does not undermine the
predominance of the common issues. Id. at *3. However, the dissent’s analysis was
instructive because it set forth reasoning supporting a wholly different conclusion.
According to the dissent, at issue were refunds for members who resigned their equity
membership. There was a waiting list for resignations, and refunds were contingent on a
member reaching the top of the waiting list, and also new memberships being sold. Id.
339
© Duane Morris LLP 2023
Duane Morris Class Action Review – 2023
