A federal judge permanently dismissed a 5-year lawsuit brought by a Tisch parent and graduate who were requesting tuition refunds because classes moved online for the COVID-19 pandemic. The graduate, who attempted to lead a class-action case against the university, had allegedly based their case on inaccurate and misleading claims.
The lawsuit followed an initial complaint filed by Tisch parent Christina Rynasko in April 2020, who claimed NYU unjustly withheld tuition refunds after the school shut down in-person attendance. The university refuted that while it still charged its regular tuition, it refunded students for housing, dining and select course-specific fees. It also offered full or partial refunds based on students’ “extenuating circumstances.”
In April 2021, the original case was dismissed due to Rynasko’s lack of standing as a parent rather than student. But in September 2023, Casey Hall-Landers, a dance major who graduated in 2022, was able to appeal the case — now attempting to represent all students who paid tuition during COVID-19 through a class action lawsuit.
The court initially found plausibility in Hall-Landers’s claim that the university breached a contractual agreement by not refunding all tuition. The “agreement” in question was a reference to NYU’s marketing materials that advertised experiences such as student internships, facilities and on-campus opportunities as a “reason to attend.” The university refuted that its pamphlets and websites — which referenced activities such as “Snowball fights in Washington Square” and “Internships in ‘the world’s music capital’” — had never been framed as guarantees.
“Among the myriad of marketing materials presented to the court, Plaintiff fails to identify a single statement promising in-person instruction beyond this generalized puffery,” NYU’s response reads.
The university continued that the marketing cannot represent all students’ expectations, citing that some of the materials referenced had never been received by the plaintiff because they got in via the waitlist. This, paired with arguments that programs vary in value — especially when moved online — supported the notion that Hall-Lander’s claims do not constitute a class-action lawsuit.
The judge ruled in March that the case would not move forward as a class action lawsuit. After the decision, Hall-Landers agreed to the entire case with a voluntary dismissal, which was formalized on Sept. 4.
In the initial complaint, Rynasko argued that their child, who studied musical theatre, was unable to fully utilize the school’s resources. The school refuted that many of the resources that the student said they unjustly paid for, such as athletic facilities and health services, were either still accessible or had never been used by the student in the first place. Hall-Landers did not adjust the alleged inaccuracies when amending the complaint.
“The online learning options being offered to NYU students are subpar in practically every aspect, from the lack of facilities, materials, and access to faculty,” the complaint reads. “Students have been deprived of the opportunity for collaborative learning and in-person dialogue, feedback, and critique.”
Between Rynosko and Hall-Landers, the case has been tried six separate times. The recent order to close it was done “with prejudice,” meaning it will not be brought back to court.
Contact Addison Alvarado at [email protected].
