DAUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

DANISH ARIF, individually and on behalf of

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

AMERICAN UNIVERSITY,

 Defendant.

Civil Action No.:

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 

AND DEMAND FOR JURY 

TRIAL

Plaintiff Danish Arif (“Plaintiff”) brings this action on behalf of himself and all others 

similarly situated against Defendant American University (“American” or “Defendant”). 

Plaintiff makes the following allegations pursuant to the investigation of his counsel and based 

upon information and belief, except as to the allegations specifically pertaining to himself, which

are based on personal knowledge.

NATURE OF THE ACTION AND FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS

1. This is a class action lawsuit on behalf of all people who paid tuition and other 

fees for the Spring 2020 academic semester at American, and who, because of Defendant’s

response to the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (“COVID-19”) pandemic, lost the benefit of the 

education for which they paid, without having their tuition and some other fees refunded to them. 

2. American is one of the country’s most preeminent universities, with an enrollment 

of over 14,000 students. The university offers more 160 formal programs, including 71 

bachelor’s degrees, 87 master’s degrees, 10 doctoral degrees, as well as JD and LLM programs, 

among others.

3. On March 10, 2020, American announced that effective March 18, 2020, all 

classes for the Spring 2020 semester would be moved to online format because of the global 

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 1 of 14
2

COVID-12 pandemic through Friday April 3. A March 12, 2020 announcement confirmed that 

online instruction would continue through the remainder of the Spring 2020 semester.

4. American has not held any in-person classes since March 6, 2020. Classes that 

have continued have only been offered in an online format, with no in-person instruction.

5. As a result of the closure of Defendant’s facilities, Defendant has not delivered 

the educational services, facilities, access and/or opportunities that Mr. Arif and the putative 

class contracted and paid for. The online learning options being offered to American students 

are subpar in practically every aspect, from the lack of facilities, materials, and access to faculty. 

Students have been deprived of the opportunity for collaborative learning and in-person 

dialogue, feedback, and critique. The remote learning options are in no way the equivalent of the 

in-person education that Plaintiff and the putative class members contracted and paid for.

6. Nonetheless, American will not refund any tuition or mandatory fees for the 

Spring 2020 semester.

7. Plaintiff and the putative class are therefore entitled to a refund of tuition and fees 

for in-person educational services, facilities, access and/or opportunities that Defendant has not 

provided. Even if Defendant did not have a choice in cancelling in-person classes, it 

nevertheless has improperly retained funds for services it is not providing.

8. Plaintiff seeks, for himself and Class members, Defendant’s disgorgement of the 

pro-rated portion of tuition and fees (or at minimum a portion thereof), proportionate to the 

amount of time that remained in the Spring Semester 2020 when classes moved online and 

campus services ceased being provided. Plaintiff seeks a return of these amounts on behalf of 

himself and the Class as defined below.

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 2 of 14
3

PARTIES

9. Plaintiff Danish Arif is a citizen of Florida who resides in Sunrise, Florida. Mr. 

Arif is an undergraduate student at American pursuing a bachelor’s degree in economics and a 

minor in finance. The economics and finance coursework at American relies extensively on inperson instruction, peer collaboration, and access to computer facilities. None of these resources 

are available to Mr. Arif while in-person classes are suspended. Mr. Arif paid approximately 

$8,994.50 in tuition and fees to Defendant for the Spring 2020 semester, including tuition for a 

cross-fit class that he can no longer participate in. Mr. Arif has not been provided a refund of 

any tuition monies paid, despite the fact that in-person classes have not been held since March 6, 

2020. 

10. Defendant American University is a private research university with its principal 

place of business at 4400 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20016-8060 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

11. The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2)(A), 

as modified by the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, because at least one member of the Class, 

as defined below, is a citizen of a different state than Defendant, there are more than 100 

members of the Class, and the aggregate amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000 exclusive of 

interest and costs.

12. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because many of the acts and 

transactions giving rise to this action occurred in this District, and because Defendant conducts 

substantial business in this District and has sufficient minimum contacts with Florida. Defendant 

has solicited students residing in Florida to attend its institution; has accepted money, including 

application fees, tuition, and other fees from students residing in Florida, has websites accessible 

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 3 of 14
4

to students in Florida, has entered into contracts with Florida residents, and generally has 

minimum contacts in Florida sufficient to satisfy the Due Process Clauses of the Florida and

United States Constitutions.

13. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because many of the 

acts and transactions giving rise to this action occurred in this District, and because Plaintiff is a 

resident of this District. Specifically, the contract that is the subject of this action was formed in 

this District.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiff And Class Members Paid Tuition And Fees For Spring Semester 2020

14. Plaintiff and Class members are individuals who paid the cost of tuition and other 

mandatory fees for the Spring 2020 Semester at American.

15. Spring Semester 2020 classes at American began on or about January 13, 2020. 

Classes and final exams for the semester are scheduled for end on or around May 5, 2020.

16. Plaintiff and Class members paid the cost of tuition for the Spring Semester 2020. 

They also paid other mandatory fees associated with the Spring Semester 2020, including a 

Sports Center Fee ($65.00), Undergraduate Activity Fee ($88.50), Student Technology Fee 

($120.00), Metro U-Pass ($160.00).

17. Tuition costs at American for the Spring 2020 Semester are approximately 

$24,535 for an undergraduate degree, $28,342 for a law degree, and $1,759 per credit for 

graduate degree programs.

18. Graduate and law students are also required to pay mandatory fees on a per 

semester basis, which include a Sports Center Fee, Activity Fee, Student Technology Fee, and 

Metro U-Pass Fee. Other fees may also apply depending on program of study.

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 4 of 14
5

19. The tuition and fees described in the paragraph above is provided by way of 

example; total damage amounts – which may include other fees that are not listed herein but that 

were not refunded – will be proven at trial. 

In Response To COVID-19, American Closed Campuses And Cancelled All In-Person Classes

20. On March 10, 2020, American announced that because of the global COVID-19 

pandemic, all in-person classes would be suspended effective March 18, 2020. American also 

directed students to leave campus by March 23. Online classes began March 18, 2020, after

students returned from Spring Break which was held from March 8 through March 15, 2020.

21. Since March 6, 2020, American has not held any in-person classes. The closure 

of American’s campuses has been extended through the end of Spring Semester 2020. Classes 

that have continued have only been offered in an online format, with no in-person instruction. 

Even classes for students with concentrations in areas where in-person instruction is especially 

crucial (such as architecture, music, theatre, and the sciences) have only had access to minimum 

online education options. 

22. As a result of the closure of Defendant’s facilities, Defendant has not delivered 

the educational services, facilities, access and/or opportunities that Plaintiff and the putative class 

contracted and paid for. Plaintiff and the putative class are therefore entitled to a refund of all 

tuition and fees for services, facilities, access and/or opportunities that Defendant has not 

provided. Even if Defendant did not have a choice in cancelling in-person classes, it 

nevertheless has improperly retained funds for services it is not providing. 

23. Plaintiff and members of the Class did not choose to attend an online institution of 

higher learning, but instead chose to attend Defendant’s institution and enroll on an in-person 

basis. 

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 5 of 14
6

24. Defendant markets the American on-campus experience as a benefit of enrollment on 

American’s website, which boasts providing over 250 different student clubs and organizations

from within a campus that is “set in the heart of the nation’s capital.”

25. The online learning options being offered to American students are subpar in 

practically every aspect and a shadow of what they once were, from the lack of facilities, 

materials, and access to faculty. Students have been deprived of the opportunity for 

collaborative learning and in-person dialogue, feedback, and critique.

26. The tuition and fees for in-person instruction at American are higher than tuition 

and fees for American’s online programs because such costs cover not just the academic 

instruction, but encompass an entirely different experience which includes but is not limited to:

• Face to face interaction with professors, mentors, and peers; 

• Access to facilities such as libraries, laboratories, computer labs, and 

study room;

• Student governance and student unions;

• Extra-curricular activities, groups, intramural sports, etc.; 

• Student art, cultures, and other activities;

• Social development and independence;

• Hands on learning and experimentation; 

• Networking and mentorship opportunities.

27. Through this lawsuit Plaintiff seeks, for himself and Class members, Defendant’s 

disgorgement of the pro-rated portion of tuition and fees, proportionate to the amount of time 

that remained in the Spring Semester 2020 when classes moved online and campus services 

ceased being provided. Plaintiff seeks return of these amounts on behalf of himself and the Class 

as defined below.

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 6 of 14
7

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

28. Plaintiff seeks to represent a class defined as all people who paid American

Spring Semester 2020 tuition and/or fees for in-person educational services that American failed 

to provide, and whose tuition and fees have not been refunded (the “Class”). Specifically 

excluded from the Class are Defendant, Defendant’s officers, directors, agents, trustees, parents, 

children, corporations, trusts, representatives, employees, principals, servants, partners, joint 

ventures, or entities controlled by Defendant, and their heirs, successors, assigns, or other 

persons or entities related to or affiliated with Defendant and/or Defendant’s officers and/or 

directors, the judge assigned to this action, and any member of the judge’s immediate family.

29. Subject to additional information obtained through further investigation and 

discovery, the foregoing definition of the Class may be expanded or narrowed by amendment or 

amended complaint.

30. Numerosity. The members of the Class are geographically dispersed throughout 

the United States and are so numerous that individual joinder is impracticable. Upon 

information and belief, Plaintiff reasonably estimates that there are tens of thousands of members 

in the Class. Although the precise number of Class members is unknown to Plaintiff, the true 

number of Class members is known by Defendant and may be determined through discovery. 

Class members may be notified of the pendency of this action by mail and/or publication through 

the distribution records of Defendant and third-party retailers and vendors. 

31. Existence and predominance of common questions of law and fact. Common 

questions of law and fact exist as to all members of the Class and predominate over any 

questions affecting only individual Class members. These common legal and factual questions 

include, but are not limited to, the following:

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 7 of 14
8

(a) whether Defendant accepted money from Class members in exchange for the 

promise to provide services;

(b) whether Defendant has provided the services for which Class members 

contracted; and

(c) whether Class members are entitled to a refund for that portion of the tuition 

and fees that was contracted for services that Defendant did not provide.

(d) whether Defendant has unlawfully converted money from Plaintiff, the Class;

and

(e) whether Defendant is liable to Plaintiff, the Class, for unjust enrichment.

32. Typicality. Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the other members of 

the Class in that, among other things, all Class members were similarly situated and were 

comparably injured through Defendant’s wrongful conduct as set forth herein. Further, there are 

no defenses available to Defendants that are unique to Plaintiff. 

33. Adequacy of Representation. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the 

interests of the Class. Plaintiff has retained counsel that is highly experienced in complex 

consumer class action litigation, and Plaintiff intends to vigorously prosecute this action on 

behalf of the Class. Furthermore, Plaintiff has no interests that are antagonistic to those of the 

Class.

34. Superiority. A class action is superior to all other available means for the fair 

and efficient adjudication of this controversy. The damages or other financial detriment suffered 

by individual Class members are relatively small compared to the burden and expense of 

individual litigation of their claims against Defendant. It would, thus, be virtually impossible for 

the Class or Subclass on an individual basis, to obtain effective redress for the wrongs committed 

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 8 of 14
9

against them. Furthermore, even if Class or Subclass members could afford such individualized 

litigation, the court system could not. Individualized litigation would create the danger of 

inconsistent or contradictory judgments arising from the same set of facts. Individualized 

litigation would also increase the delay and expense to all parties and the court system from the 

issues raised by this action. By contrast, the class action device provides the benefits of 

adjudication of these issues in a single proceeding, economies of scale, and comprehensive 

supervision by a single court, and presents no unusual management difficulties under the 

circumstances.

35. In the alternative, the Class may also be certified because:

(a) the prosecution of separate actions by individual Class members would create 

a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual Class

members that would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the 

Defendant;

(b) the prosecution of separate actions by individual Class members would create 

a risk of adjudications with respect to them that would, as a practical matter, 

be dispositive of the interests of other Class members not parties to the 

adjudications, or substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their 

interests; and/or

(c) Defendant has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the 

Class as a whole, thereby making appropriate final declaratory and/or 

injunctive relief with respect to the members of the Class as a whole.

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 9 of 14
10

COUNT I

Breach Of Contract

(On Behalf Of The Class)

36. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in all 

preceding paragraphs of this complaint.

37. Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the members of the Class

against Defendant.

38. Through the admission agreement and payment of tuition and fees, Plaintiff and 

each member of the Class entered into a binding contract with Defendant. 

39. As part of the contract, and in exchange for the aforementioned consideration, 

Defendant promised to provide certain services, all as set forth above. Plaintiff and Class

members fulfilled their end of the bargain when they paid monies due for Spring Semester 2020 

tuition. Tuition for Spring Semester 2020 was intended to cover in-person educational services 

from January through May 2020. In exchange for tuition monies paid, Class members were 

entitled to in-person educational services through the end of the Spring Semester.

40. Defendant has failed to provide the contracted for services and has otherwise not 

performed under the contract as set forth above. Defendant has retained monies paid by Plaintiff 

and the Class for their Spring Semester 2020 tuition and fees, without providing them the benefit 

of their bargain.

41. Plaintiff and members of the Class have suffered damage as a direct and 

proximate result of Defendant’s breach, including but not limited to being deprived of the 

education, experience, and services to which they were promised and for which they have 

already paid. 

42. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breach, Plaintiff and the Class are 

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 10 of 14
11

entitled to damages, to be decided by the trier of fact in this action, to include but no be limited 

to reimbursement of certain tuition, fees, and other expenses that were collected by Defendant 

for services that Defendant has failed to deliver. Defendant should return the pro-rated portion 

of any Spring Semester 2020 tuition and fees (or at minimum a portion thereof) for education 

services not provided since American shut down on March 10, 2020.

43. Defendant’s performance under the contract is not excused due to COVID-19. 

Indeed, Defendant should have refunded the pro-rated portion of any education services not 

provided. Even if performance was excused or impossible, Defendant would nevertheless be 

required to return the funds received for services it will not provide.

COUNT II

Unjust Enrichment

(On Behalf Of The Class)

44. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in all 

preceding paragraphs of this complaint.

45. Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the members of the Class

against Defendant.

46. Plaintiff and members of the Class conferred a benefit on Defendant in the form 

of monies paid for Spring Semester 2020 tuition and other fees in exchange for certain service 

and promises. Tuition for Spring Semester 2020 was intended to cover in-person educational 

services from January through May 2020. In exchange for tuition monies paid, Class members 

were entitled to in-person educational services through the end of the Spring Semester.

47. Defendant voluntarily accepted and retained this benefit by accepting payment.

48. Defendant has retained this benefit, even though Defendant has failed to provide 

the education, experience, and services for which the tuition and fees were collected, making

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 11 of 14
12

Defendant’s retention unjust under the circumstances. Accordingly, Defendant should return the 

pro-rated portion of any Spring Semester 2020 tuition and fees (or at minimum a portion thereof) 

for education services not provided since American shut down on March 10, 2020.

49. It would be unjust and inequitable for Defendant to retain the benefit, and 

Defendant should be required to disgorge this unjust enrichment. 

COUNT III

Conversion

(On Behalf Of The Class)

50. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in all 

preceding paragraphs of this complaint.

51. Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the members of the Class 

against Defendant.

52. Plaintiff and members of the Class have an ownership right to the in-person 

educational services they were supposed to be provided in exchange for their Spring Semester 

2020 tuition and fee payments to Defendant. 

53. Defendant intentionally interfered with the rights of Plaintiff and the Class when 

it moved all classes to an online format and discontinued in-person educational services for 

which tuition and fees were intended to pay.

54. Plaintiff and members of the Class demand the return of the pro-rated portion of 

any Spring Semester 2020 tuition and fees (or at minimum a portion thereof) for education 

services not provided since American shut down on March 10, 2020.

55. Defendant’s retention of the fees paid by Plaintiff and members of the Class

without providing the educational services for which they paid, deprived Plaintiff and Class

members of the benefits for which the tuition and fees paid.

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 12 of 14
13

56. This interference with the services for which Plaintiff and members of the Class

paid damaged Plaintiff and Class members in that they paid tuition and fees for services that will 

not be provided.

57. Plaintiff and Class members are entitled to the return of pro-rated portion of any 

Spring Semester 2020 tuition and fees for education services not provided since American shut 

down on March 10, 2020.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, seeks

judgment against Defendant, as follows:

(a) For an order certifying the Class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure and naming Plaintiff as representative of the Class and 

Plaintiff’s attorneys as Class Counsel to represent the Class;

(b) For an order finding in favor of Plaintiff and the Class on all counts 

asserted herein;

(c) For compensatory and punitive damages in amounts to be determined by 

the Court and/or jury;

(d) For prejudgment interest on all amounts awarded;

(e) For an order of restitution and all other forms of equitable monetary relief;

(f) For injunctive relief as pleaded or as the Court may deem proper; and

(g) For an order awarding Plaintiff and the Class his reasonable attorneys’ 

fees and expenses and costs of suit.

DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of any

and all issues in this action so triable of right.

/

/

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 13 of 14
14

Dated: May 4, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.

By: /s/ Sarah N. Westcot 

 Sarah N. Westcot 

Scott A. Bursor (pro hac vice app. forthcoming)

Sarah N. Westcot (pro hac vice app. forthcoming)

2665 S. Bayshore Drive, Suite 220

Miami, FL 33133

Telephone: (305) 330-5512

Facsimile: (305) 676-9006

Email: scott@bursor.com

swestcot@bursor.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 0:20-cv-60902-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2020 Page 14 of 14