19.  Even if performance was excused or impossible, Defendant would nevertheless be required  to return the funds received for services and/or goods that it did not provide.  21.  Duke is one of the nation’s most prestigious universities, offering more than 50  major and 50 minor programs of study and 23 certificate programs across its two undergraduate  schools, Trinity College of Arts and Sciences and Pratt School of Engineering. Duke touts the  opportunity to combine major, minor, and certificate programs into “437,989 unique academic  combinations.”7  Duke also offers master’s and doctoral degrees in more than 80 departments  and programs of study.8   22.  In the 2020 edition of U.S. News & World Report’s Best Colleges, Duke was  ranked as the tenth “Best National University.”  It also tied for the seventeenth spot in the same  rankings for best undergraduate teaching.    23.  Duke is also among the nation’s most expensive private secondary educations,  and estimates that for the 2020-2021 academic year, the total cost of undergraduate attendance is  $81,302, an amount which exceeds the median household income in the United States.    25.  In highlighting its undergraduate programs, Duke touts its 8:1 student-to-faculty  ratio and “countless opportunities to nurture personal connections.”10 The school notes that “At  Duke, you'll be surrounded by some of the world's brightest minds. But you won't just be  studying with them-you'll be working with them. After all, the world's toughest problems won't  be solved by isolated individuals but rather through interdisciplinary exploration, unconventional  thinking, and serious collaboration.”11 Every Duke student is allotted $70 per semester to invite a  faculty member to dine with them at various locations around campus to help establish lasting  relationships that might not have developed in the classroom.”12   26.  Duke also highlights its extensive on-campus facilities, which include  “collaborative study spaces, classrooms, and seminar rooms equipped with whiteboards and the  latest technology to help promote interdisciplinary, team-based, and data-driven research at  Duke,” the 70,000 square-foot Rubenstein Arts Center housing “multipurpose studios, seminar  classrooms, a makerspace, lounge, theater, and more,” and lab facilities, such as the Innovation  Co-Lab, “which houses cutting-edge tools such as 3-D printing, YR, and biometrical analysis.”13   28.  The Graduate School also markets to students by stating: “To come to Duke  University for graduate study is to be immersed in the welcoming environment of an  educational community dedicated to the pursuit and production of knowledge that will serve the  broader society…. [A]t the Duke University Graduate School, among your fellow graduate  students, and within the broader community of Durham, you will find the people, commitment,  support, and resources to help you succeed and enjoy the journey.”15   29.  Because of the high-quality, hands-on, and proven academic opportunities that it  advertises, and on-campus experiences and services it guarantees, Defendant has charged  substantial tuition and fees for a Duke education.   30.  For example, after Plaintiff registered for graduate courses for the Spring 2020  semester and Defendant accepted Plaintiff’s registration, Defendant charged Plaintiff $27,840.00  in tuition, as well as a $10 Grad Student Services Fee, an $18.25 Grad Student Activity Fee, a  $158 Recreation Fee, and a $417 Health Fee.16 After receiving a scholarship, Plaintiff had to take  out loans of more than $24,500 to pay for his tuition and fees for the Spring 2020 semester.   32.  Plaintiff has neither received nor been offered any refund or reimbursement for  the in-person tuition or fees that he paid for the Spring 2020 semester at Duke.    33.  Defendant, through President Price, has acknowledged that Duke was “engaged in  what may be the greatest experiment in our university’s history—indeed, in the history of higher  education.” Duke has conceded that “[t]he coming weeks won’t be easy, and there will of course  be growing pains” and has asked for students’ “flexibility as we transition to new models of  teaching, enabled by technology and accelerated by necessity.”17 Duke further acknowledged  that if its experiment was done right, students would have “the tools you need to complete your  programs and keep learning…”18   34.  It is not at all clear that Duke is getting its experiment right. Duke professors were  advised to modify course syllabi and simplify assignments in order to accommodate remote  teaching. Professors were provided links to learn on the fly how to use Zoom software for  classes.19 Many professors have simply pre-recorded lectures and posted them online. But  according to Duke professors, recorded lectures are like “speaking into dead space,” and even  “live” Zoom classes are like “talking to a wall of black boxes” because many students have their  computers’ camera turned off.20    36.  The result of this haphazard approach is that Plaintiff and Class members have  been provided with a second-rate online substitute for the hands-on, in-person coursework in  which they enrolled—and for which they paid.    37.  Yet despite providing students with an admittedly experimental educational  experience, to date Duke has refused to provide students with prorated reimbursements of tuition  and fees. In fact, Duke’s Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page on its website does not even  mention tuition or fee refunds in any way.22  In effect, Defendant has placed the entire financial  burden of its “experiment” onto Plaintiff and the Class.    38.  As a result of the closure of Duke, Defendant has not delivered the educational  services, facilities, programs, and opportunities for which Plaintiff and the Class contracted and  paid.  Plaintiff and the proposed Class are therefore entitled to a full refund of the portion of the  fees and tuition for the latter half of the Spring 2020 semester that Defendant did not provide, or  which it provided in a severely diminished manner.    39.  The remote, online learning “classes” offered to Spring 2020 students since  March deprive students of in-person learning from their peers and school faculty.  The move to  these remote classes also deprives students of access to the facilities, materials, and opportunities  only offered on Duke’s physical (as opposed to virtual) campus, including laboratory and  research experience, use of on campus facilities (e.g., the gym and libraries), and use of on  campus services and events (e.g., attending sporting events, end-of-year programs and events,  and various student services).   41.  The online classes offered to Plaintiff and his peers are also of substantially lower  quality and are objectively worth less than the in-person courses for which they enrolled and  paid.   42.  Duke’s post-COVID-19 online student offerings do not even come close to  comparing with Duke’s in-person course experiences. Instead, Plaintiff and Class members have  been forced into overpriced bubble-gum and duct-tape substitutes. Yet, despite offering students  inferior, poorly planned, and poorly executed online courses, Defendant refuses to issue refunds  to Plaintiff and thousands of other students.   43.  Moreover, Defendant has refused to issue refunds for mandatory fees as well.  Since the campus shut-down Plaintiff and the Class have not received the benefits of these fees,  nor been offered a refund for them.   45.  Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a), (b)(2), (b)(3), and/or (c)(4), Plaintiff brings this  action on behalf of himself and the following Class:  All persons who paid tuition, fees, and/or other costs to Duke University for (1) in- person classes for the Spring 2020 semester or a subsequent term and (2) who did  not receive the benefits for which they paid.    46.  The following persons and entities are excluded from the Class: Defendant and its  officers, directors, employees, subsidiaries, and affiliates; all judges assigned to this case and any  members of their immediate families; and the parties’ counsel in this litigation. Plaintiff reserves  the right to modify, change, or expand the class definition, including by proposing additional  subclasses, based upon discovery and further investigation.   47.  A class action is a superior means to ensure the fair and efficient adjudication of  this case.  The damages suffered by individual Class members are relatively small compared to  the burden and expense of individual litigation of the claims described herein against the  Defendant.  Moreover, individualized actions would run the risk of creating inconsistent or  contradictory judgments arising from the same set of facts and would increase the likely delay  and expense to all parties involved and the Court itself.  By contrast, by proceeding as a class  action, the claims at issue can be adjudicated efficiently through economies of scale.   48.  Numerosity.  In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1), the members the  proposed Class are so numerous and geographically dispersed that individual joinder of all Class  members is impracticable.  Although the precise number of Class members is unknown presently  to Plaintiff, the Class is presumed to number more than 15,000 people and is easily ascertainable  through enrollment and financial records maintained by Defendants.   50.  Typicality.  Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3), Plaintiff’s claims are typical of  the other Class members’ claims because Plaintiff and the other Class members each paid for  certain costs associated with the Spring 2020 semester but were not provided the services that  those costs were meant to cover.  Each suffered damages in the form of their lost tuition, fees,  and other monies paid to Defendant, and the claims all arise from the same Duke practices and  course of conduct.  There are no defenses available that are unique to the Plaintiff.   52.  Plaintiff repeats and alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-51, above, as if fully  alleged herein.    53.  Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the other members of the  Class.    54.  Plaintiff and the other members of the Class entered into binding contracts with  Defendant, which provided that Plaintiff and the other members of the Class would pay tuition  and fees, to Duke, in exchange for on-campus educational, social, and other experiences and  access to facilities.   55.  As part of their contracts with Duke, and, in exchange for adequate consideration  that Plaintiff and members of the proposed Class provided, Defendant promised to provide  educational and campus services and a meal plan during the Spring 2020 semester.   56.  Defendant failed to provide the services that it was obligated to perform under its  contracts with Plaintiff and the proposed Class.  Defendant has retained tuition and fees paid by  Plaintiff and the other members of the Class for the full 2020 Spring semester without providing  them the promised benefits, instead providing those benefits for only a portion of the 2020  Spring semester.     57.  By contrast, Plaintiff and the other members of the Class fulfilled their end of the  bargain when they paid the monies due and owing for their full tuition and fees for the semester.    59.  Plaintiff and members of the Class have suffered damages as a direct and  proximate result of Defendant’s breach, including being deprived of the education, experience,  and services that they were promised and expected to obtain, and for which they have paid.   They are entitled to damages including but not limited to prorated reimbursement of the tuition,  fees, and other expenses that were collected by Defendant for services that Defendant failed to  deliver fully.   60.  Defendant’s performance under the contracts is not excused because of COVID-  61.  Plaintiff repeats and alleges the allegations in Paragraphs 1-60, above, as if fully  alleged herein.   62.  Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the other members of the  Class in the alternative to the breach of contract claim brought in Count I.    63.  Plaintiff and other members of the proposed Class conferred a benefit or  enrichment on Defendant by paying tuition and mandatory fees to Defendant which were  beneficial to Defendant, at the expense of Plaintiff and the other members of the Class.    65.  Defendant has retained the benefit paid by Plaintiff and the Class despite its  failure to provide the services for which the benefit was paid.   66.  There is no justification or cause for Defendant’s failure to return the portion of  the tuition and fees that Defendant has unjustifiably kept for itself even though it failed to  complete the services for which Plaintiff provided the funds to Defendant.   67.  Accordingly, Defendant has been unjustly enriched and should pay as restitution a  prorated portion of the funds for the Spring 2020 semester that Plaintiff and the proposed Class  paid for tuition, required fees, and meal plan fees.  68.  Plaintiff repeat and re-allege the allegations in Paragraphs 1-67, above, as if fully  alleged herein.    69.  Plaintiff brings this claim on behalf of himself and on behalf of the Class.    70.  Plaintiff and the other members of the Class have a right to the in-person  educational and extra-curricular services that they were supposed to be provided in exchange for  their payments to Defendant.   72.  Defendant deprived Plaintiff and the other members of the Class of their fees or of  the right to the services for which their fees were intended to be used.   73.  Class members demanded the return of the prorated, unused fees for the  remainder of the Spring 2020 semester.   74.  Defendant’s retention of the fees paid by Plaintiff and the other members of the  Class without providing the services for which they paid deprived Plaintiff and the other  members of the Class of the benefits for which the fees were paid.  This interference with the  services for which Plaintiff and the other members of the Class paid damaged Plaintiff and the  other members of the Class in that they paid fees for services that were not and will not be  provided.   75.  Plaintiff and the other members of the Class are entitled to the return of prorated  unused portion of the fees paid, through the end of the Spring 2020 semester  Breach of Contract   Conversion   Unjust Enrichment  