35. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ Spring term began with the first day of classes  on or about January 13, 2020.5   36. Upon information and belief, Defendants’ Spring term was scheduled to conclude with  the last day of classes on April 28, 2020 and exams taking place April 30th through May  6th.6   37. Accordingly, Defendants’ Spring semester was scheduled and contracted to consist of  approximately 112 days.   39. Defendants’ Spring Break was scheduled to begin March 9, 2020 and to conclude on  March 13th; however, it was extended through March 20th.8   40. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, Defendants announced on March 11, 2020 that  Spring Break would be extended by one additional week, with no academic instruction  the week of March 16, 2020 and course instruction resuming on March 23, 2020 but  provided via remote delivery, rather than in-person instruction through at least April 6,  2020.  Moreover, all events of more than 50 attendees were cancelled and all visiting  speakers were required to be cancelled or postponed.9   41. On March 18, 2020, the University announced that “For the health and well-being of our  campus community, beginning 5 p.m. on Thursday, March 19 through at least April 6,  Highsmith Student Union, Brown Dining Hall, certain residence halls where approved  students with qualified exceptions reside, and the Health and Counseling Center will be  the only facilities open on the UNC Asheville campus and access will be restricted to  faculty, staff and students. All other facilities, including Ramsey Library, the Student  Recreation Center, and Justice Center will be closed at least through April 6.”10   42. On March 20, 2020, the University extended its remote instruction through the end of the  semester.11   43. However, Defendants have refused and continue to refuse to offer any pro-rated tuition  discounts as a result of moving classes online.   45. Likewise, Plaintiff and members of the proposed Fees Class have been and will be  deprived of utilizing services for which they have already paid, as set forth in Paragraph  29 above.   46. To date, Defendants have not announced any plans to discount these fees.   47. As of the drafting of this Complaint, Defendant has announced that it will be offering full  pro-rata refunds for room and board, dating back to March 16, 2020.  Accordingly, this  action does not seek to certify an On-Campus Housing Class or a Meals Class at this  time.  However, Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this complaint to plead such  additional causes of action should Defendant fail to process the promised credits and/or  calculate the credits in an inadequate manner.  48. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and as a class action, pursuant to the  provisions of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of the following  Classes:  The Tuition Class:  All people who paid tuition for or on behalf of students enrolled in classes at the  University for the Spring 2020 semester who were denied live in-person  instruction and forced to use online distance learning platforms for the latter  portion of that semester.  The Fees Class:  All people who paid fees for or on behalf of students enrolled in classes at the  University for the Spring 2020 semester.   50. Certification of Plaintiff’s claims for class-wide treatment is appropriate because Plaintiff  can prove the elements of his claims on a class-wide basis using the same evidence as  would be used to prove those elements in individual actions alleging the same claims.   51. This action has been brought and may be properly maintained on behalf of the Class  proposed herein under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.  Numerosity: Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1)   52. The members of the Class are so numerous and geographically dispersed that individual  joinder of all Class members is impracticable.  Plaintiff is informed and believes there are  thousands of members of the Class, the precise number being unknown to Plaintiff, but  such number being ascertainable from Defendants' records.  Class members may be  notified of the pendency of this action by recognized, Court-approved notice  dissemination methods, which may include U.S. mail, electronic mail, internet postings,  and/or published notice.  Commonality and Predominance: Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2)   55. Plaintiff is an adequate Class representative because his interests do not conflict with the  interests of other members of the Class she seeks to represent.  Plaintiff has retained  counsel competent and experienced in complex litigation; and Plaintiff intends to  prosecute the action vigorously.  The Class’s interests will be fairly and adequately  protected by Plaintiff and her counsel.  Superiority: Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3)   56. A class action is superior to any other available means for the fair and efficient  adjudication of this controversy, and no unusual difficulties are likely to be encountered  in the management of this class action.  The damages or other financial detriment  suffered by Plaintiff and other Class members are relatively small compared to the  burden and expense that would be required to individually litigate their claims against  Defendants, so it would be impracticable for members of the Class to individually seek  redress for Defendants' wrongful conduct.   57. Even if Class members could afford individual litigation, the Court system likely could  not.  Individualized litigation creates a potential for inconsistent or contradictory  judgments and increases the delay and expense to all parties and the court system.  By  contrast, the class action device presents far fewer management difficulties and provides  the benefits of single adjudication, economy of scale, comprehensive supervision by a  single court, and finality of the litigation.  Certification of Specific Issues: Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(4)   59. The University has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to Plaintiff and  the other Class members, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief and  declaratory relief, as described herein, with respect to the Class members as a whole.  60. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding allegations as though fully set forth  herein.   61. Plaintiff brings this count on behalf of himself and other members of the Tuition Class.   62. Plaintiff and the Tuition Class entered into contracts with the University which provided  that Plaintiff and other members of the Tuition Class would pay tuition for or on behalf of  students and, in exchange, the University would provide live in-person instruction in a  physical classroom.   63. Plaintiff and other members of the Tuition Class fulfilled their end of the bargain when  they paid tuition for the Spring 2020 semester either out-of-pocket or by using student  loan financing, or otherwise.   64. The University breached the contract with Plaintiff and the Tuition Class by moving all  classes for the Spring 2020 semester to online distance learning platforms, without  reducing or refunding tuition accordingly.   65. The University retained tuition monies paid by Plaintiff and other members of the Tuition  Class, without providing them the full benefit of their bargain.   67. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' breach, Plaintiff and the Tuition Class are  legally and equitably entitled to damages, to be decided by the trier of fact in this action,  to include but not be limited to disgorgement of the difference between the value of the  online learning which is being provided versus the value of the live in-person instruction  in a physical classroom that was contracted for.  68. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding allegations as though fully set forth  herein.   69. Plaintiff brings this count on behalf of himself and other members of the Tuition Class.   70. The University has received a benefit at the expense of Plaintiff and other members of the  Tuition Class to which it is not entitled.   71. Plaintiff and other members of the Tuition Class paid substantial tuition for live in-person  instruction in physical classrooms and did not receive the full benefit of the bargain.   72. Plaintiff and other members of the Tuition Class conferred this benefit on Defendants  when they paid the tuition.   73. Plaintiff and other members of the Tuition Class did not confer this benefit gratuitously.   74. Defendants have realized this benefit by accepting such payment.   76. Equity and good conscience require that the University return a portion of the monies  paid in tuition to Plaintiff and other members of the Tuition Class.   77. Defendants should be required to disgorge this unjust enrichment.  78. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding allegations as though fully set forth  herein.   79. Plaintiff brings this count on behalf of himself and other members of the Fees Class.   80. Plaintiff and the Fees Class entered into contracts with the University which provided  that Plaintiff and other members of the Fees Class would pay certain fees for or on behalf  of students and, in exchange, the University would provide access and services related to  those fees, such as access to student activities, athletics, wellness centers, libraries, etc.   81. Plaintiff and other members of the Fees Class fulfilled their end of the bargain when they  paid these fees for the Spring 2020 semester either out-of-pocket or by using student  financing, or otherwise.   82. The University breached the contract with Plaintiff and the Fees Class by moving all  classes for the Spring 2020 semester to online distance learning platforms, constructively  evicting students from campus, and closing most campus buildings and facilities.   83. The University retained fees paid by Plaintiff and other members of the Fees Class,  without providing them the full benefit of their bargain.   85. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' breach, Plaintiff and the Fees Class are  legally and equitably entitled to damages, to be decided by the trier of fact in this action,  to include but not be limited to disgorgement of the pro-rata amount of fees that was  collected but for which access and services were not provided.  86. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding allegations as though fully set forth  herein.   87. Plaintiff brings this count on behalf of himself and other members of the Fees Class.   88. The University has received a benefit at the expense of Plaintiff and other members of the  Fees Class to which it is not entitled.   89. Plaintiff and other members of the Fees Class paid substantial student fees for on campus  benefits and services and did not receive the full benefit of the bargain.   90. Plaintiff and other members of the Fees Class conferred this benefit on Defendants when  they paid the fees.   91. Plaintiff and other members of the Fees Class did not confer this benefit gratuitously.   92. Defendants have realized this benefit by accepting such payment.   93. Defendants have retained this benefit, even though Defendants have failed to provide the  access and services for which the fees were collected, making Defendants' retention  unjust under the circumstances.    94. Equity and good conscience require that the University return a pro-rata portion of the  monies paid in fees to Plaintiff and other members of the Fees Class.   BREACH OF CONTRACT  (Plaintiff and Other Members of the Tuition Class)   BREACH OF CONTRACT  (Plaintiff and Other Members of the Fees Class)   UNJUST ENRICHMENT  (Plaintiff and Other Members of the Fees Class)   UNJUST ENRICHMENT  (Plaintiff and Other Members of the Tuition Class)  