FILED CIT ESERVE

5’1353125133?! DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO., TEXAS

Stephanie Clark DEPUTY DC-22-051 35 CAUSE NO.

ELLA CAINE, NISHA DHUNGANA IN THE DISTRICT COURT

SILWA, JOSEPHINE OGATO, SHANTORIA MOORE, FRANKLIN

OKOH, CHYRSTAL JEFFERSON, NARGAS SAYED, SHARAM DALAWY, KRISTY ABERCROMBIE, DARNIQUE ADAMS, DANIELLE GRANT, KARAM

DALAWY, ROLONDA MOORE, SHARON FERGUSON, NHU TRAN, ALYSSA DAVILA, ADRIAN JONES, ALISHA TERRY, AND MARI ISABELL PLAINTIFF,

4th

JUDICIAL DISTRICT

V.

EDUVISION, INC. (D/B/A ARIZONA COLLEGE OF NURSING DALLAS; AZC EDUCATION, INC.; ARIZONA COLLEGE DALLAS) DEFENDANT. OF DALLAS COUNTY, TX

PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL PETITION

T0 THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

COMES NOW, Plaintiffs Ella Caine, Nisha Dhungana Silwa, Josephine Ogato,

Shantoria Moore, Franklin Okoh, Chyrstal Jefferson, Nargas Sayed, Sharam Dalawy, Kristy

Abercrombie, Damique Adams, Danielle Grant, Karam Dalawy, Rolonda Moore, Sharon

Ferguson, Nhu Tran, Alyssa DaVila, and Maria Herrera who file their Original Petition asserting

claims against Defendant Eduvision, Inc. (d/b/a/ Arizona College of Nursing Dallas;

(“Defendant”)). Defendant violated several laws within Texas. In support, Plaintiffs show the

Court the following:

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 1 of 9 PageID 9
A. DISCOVERY-CONTROL PLAN

1. Plaintiffs intend to conduct discovery under Level of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure

190.2. Plaintiffs seek damages exceeding $1,000,000.00.

B. PARTIES

2. Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs Ella Caine, Nisha Dhungana Silwa, Josephine Ogato, Shantoria

Moore, Franklin Okoh, Chyrstal Jefferson, Nargas Sayed, Sharam Dalawy, Kristy Abercrombie,

Damique Adams, Danielle Grant, Karam Dalawy, Rolonda Moore, Sharon Ferguson, Nhu Tran,

Alyssa Davila, Adrian Jones, Alisha Terry, and Maria Herrera at all times material to this lawsuit,

are individuals who are citizens of the State of Texas residing in Texas.

3. Defendant. Eduvision, Inc. (d/b/a/ Arizona College of Nursing Dallas; (“Defendant”))is

foreign for-profit corporation who is operating Arizona College of Nursing- Dallas in 8330

Lyndon Johnson Fwy, Dallas, TX 75243. Defendant’s principal place of business located at

4425 W. Olive Ave, Ste. 300, Glendale, AZ 85302 USA. Plaintiffs requestthat citation be issued

and served on Defendant through its registered agent, Corporation System at 1999 Bryan St.,

Ste. 900, Dallas, TX 75201-3136 USA

4. Whenever in this Petition it is alleged that Defendant(s) committed any act or omission, it

is meant that the Defendant's officers, directors, affiliates, subsidiaries, partners, agents, servants,

or employees committed such act or omission and that at the time such or omission was

committed, it was done with the full authorization, ratification or approval of Defendant or was

done in routine normal course and scope of their agency and employment as Defendant's

officers, directors, affiliates, subsidiaries, partners, agents, servants, or employees.

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 2 of 9 PageID 10
JURISDICTION

5. The Court has jurisdiction over the lawsuit because the amount in controversy exceeds

this Court’s minimum jurisdictional requirements. This Court has personal jurisdiction over

Defendant. Specifically, Defendant operates nursing school in Dallas, Texas and the claim

arises from Defendant’s operation of said nursing school.

D. VENUE

6. Venue for this suit is proper

in Dallas County under the Texas Civil Practice Remedies

Code 15.001 because part of the cause of action sued upon occurred in Dallas County, Texas.

E. CONDITION PRECEDENT

7. Plaintiff has fulfilled all conditions precedentto the filing of the instant petition.

F. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

8. Plaintiffs consist of students who enrolled with Defendant in order to pursue educational

requirements and career path in nursing.

9. Prior to the enrolling with Defendant, Defendant represented to Plaintiffs that their

credits would transfer to any other school if needed.

10. It was not until many of the Plaintiffs attempted to transfer their credit to other schools

did they learn that the credits earned at Defendant’s school would not transfer to other schools.

11. Further, Plaintiffs signed enrollment agreements outlining paymentsthat are to be paid to

Defendant for classes. Defendant overcharged for their credit hours perthe enrollment

agreements.

12. Defendant unfairly increase the difficulty of the program to encourage students to fail

course and applied restrictions to students to preventthem completing their courses. Defendant

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 3 of 9 PageID 11
tested on different subjects

that were not taughtin the classes. After informing students that the

test would comprise of certain information, students were tested in other areas. Defendant also

failed students despite the students correctly answering questions. In other instances, Defendant

disqualified students from the program citing background issues despite receiving notice that

said background issues existed at or near the time of enrollment.

13. In 2020, Covid-19 began ravaging the United States and the rest of the world. As part of

the United States’ plan to alleviate the impact of Covid-l9, the United States passed the CARES

Act and provided students with emergency Covid-19 relief funds.

14. Defendants misappropriated these funds and failed to distribute the funds to the students

directly. G. COUNT I—BREACH 0F CONTRACT

15. Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference each and every paragraph of the facts and allegations

stated in this Petition as iffully and completely set forth herein.

16. Plaintiffs entered in valid enforceable agreement with Defendant and paid their tuition

per

their agreement.

l7. Defendant breached the agreement by overcharging students and failing to provide the

appropriate education to the students.

18. Defendant also breached an implied duty of good faith and fair dealing. Defendant

created obstacles to prevent students from passing courses.

H. COUNT II—DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACTS VIOLATIONS

19. Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference each and every paragraph of the facts and allegations

stated in this Petition as iffully and completely set forth herein.

20. Plaintiffs are consumers as defined under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 4 of 9 PageID 12
21. Defendant committed Violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, including

but not limited to:

22.

Defendant.

a.

h.

causing confusion or misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or

certification of goods or services;

representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics,

ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they do not have or that person has

sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection which the person does not;

representing that goods or services are of particular standard, quality, or grade, or

that goods are of particular style or model, ifthey are of another;

representing that an agreement confers or involves rights, remedies, or obligations which it does not have or involve, or which are prohibited by law;

failing to disclose information concerning goods or services which was known at the

time of the transaction if such failure to disclose such information was intended to

induce the consumer into transaction into which the consumer would not have

entered had the information been disclosed;

H' using the term "corporation, Incorporated," or an abbreviation of either of those

terms in the name of business entity that is not incorporated under the laws of this

state or anotherjurisdiction;

taking advantage of the Plaintiffs lack of knowledge, ability, experience, or capacity

of the consumer to grossly unfair degree; and

breach ofwarranty.

But for these deceptive practices, Plaintiff would not have entered into an agreement with

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 5 of 9 PageID 13
23.

24.

25.

26.

Plaintiff seeks damages within the jurisdictionallimits of this Court.

I. COUNT III—FRAUD AND FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT

Plaintiff hereby adopt by reference each and every paragraph of the facts and allegations

stated in this Original Petition as iffully and completely set forth herein.

Defendant made misrepresentationsto students that credit hours earned at Defendant’s

school could transfer to any other program.

The Defendant knew that these representations were false when they were made and made the misrepresentations

so that Plaintiffwould acquire Defendants services.

27.

28.

29.

30.

The Defendant intended to induce Plaintiff to rely upon these representations.

Plaintiffrelied on these representations and suffered injury as result.

Plaintiff seek actual damages within the jurisdictionallimits of this Court.

J. COUNT IV—PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL

Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference each and every paragraph of the facts and allegations

stated in this Original Petition as iffully and completely set forth herein.

31. Defendant promised an education and credit that could transfer to any other school, with

the foresightthat the promise would be relied on by Plaintiffs.

32.

33.

34.

35.

Plaintiffs paid money in reliance of the promise to their detriment.

Defendant acted with the intent to harm Plaintiffs and to profitfrom their actions.

Plaintiffs seeks damages within the jurisdictionallimits ofthis Court.

K. COUNT V—UNJUST ENRICHMENT

Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference each and every paragraph of the facts and allegations

stated in this Original Petition as iffully and completely set forth herein.

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 6 of 9 PageID 14
36. Defendant unjustly obtained payments

from Plaintiffs through fraud, duress, and or an

undue advantage.

37. Defendant used its position as an educational facility to take advantage of students

attempting to make better life for themselves. Plaintiffs, believing that Defendant would teach

Plaintiffs and subsequently test Plaintiffs on the taught materials, paid Defendants to enter the

program.

38. Plaintiffs seeks liquidated and un-liquidated damages within the jurisdictionallimits of

this Court.

L. COUNT VI— CONVERSION AND THEFT LIABILITY ACT

39. Plaintifls hereby adopt by reference each and every paragraph of the facts and allegations

stated in this Original Petition as iffully and completely set forth herein.

40. Plaintiffs were given higher education grants under the CARES Act. Under the CARES

Act, Defendant is supposed to distribute funds directly to the Plaintiffs but refused to do so.

Defendant misappropriated the funds and refused to distribute the funds to Plaintiffs.

41. Defendant failed to obtain effective consent from the Plaintiffs to keep said funds. M. COUNT VI—MONEY HAD AND RECEIVIQ

42. Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference each and every paragraph of the facts and allegations

stated in this Original Petition as iffully and completely set forth herein.

43. Plaintiffs were given higher education grants under the CARES Act. Under the CARES

Act, Defendant is supposed to distribute funds directly to the Plaintiffs but refused to do so.

Defendant took the funds and, in some instances, refused to credit the Plaintiffs.

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 7 of 9 PageID 15
N. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE

44. Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Plaintiffs requestthat defendant disclose, within 50 days of the service of this request, the information or material described in Rule

194.2.

0. AMOUNT OF DAMAGES

45. Defendant’s conduct caused injury to Plaintiff, which resulted in the following damages:

(1) actual damages, (2) court costs, (3) reasonable attorneys’ fees; (4)

loss of future interest, (5)

lost income, (6)future pecuniary loss, (7) mental anguish, (8) inconvenience, and (9) all other

remedies deemed appropriate by law to which they may be entitled.

P.

46. Plaintiff entrusts the determination of liability and damages suffered to the sole discretion

of the jury in this matter.

Q.

47. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffrequestthat Defendants be cited to

appear and answer, and that upon trial of her cause, have judgment against Defendants for (1) all

economic and actual damages suffered by Plaintiff, (2) prejudgment and post-judgmentinterest

at the legal rate, (3) costs of court, (4) attorney's fees, (5) all expert fees, as allowed by law, (6)

exemplary damages, and (7) such other relief, both at law and in equity, deemed proper by this

Court.

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 8 of 9 PageID 16
Respectfully submitted,

NGUYEN EmKAN

7211 Regency Square B1vd., Suite 220 Houston, Texas 77036

Tel: 281.940.4088

Fax: 832.271.4299

DON T. NGUYEN

State Bar No. 24092897 don@nk1aw.us

Attorney for Plaintiffs.

EXHIBIT C

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-3 Filed 08/08/22 Page 9 of 9 PageID 17