INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Supreme Court on Wednesday sided with the state legislature over a Ball State University student who wants a refund for his pandemic-interrupted classes in early 2020.
College student Keller Mellowitz was at Ball State for the Spring 2020 semester when the university “sent students home, canceled in-person classes, and closed campus facilities because of COVID-19,” according to court filings.
He filed a class action complaint against the university and its board of trustees in Marion County Superior Court in May 2020, accusing them of “breach of contract and unjust enrichment” over decisions to cancel in-person classes and close campus facilities due to the pandemic.
Specifically, Mellowitz cited Ball State’s retention of tuition and “numerous” fees, including those for student services, university technology, student recreation, student health, and student transportation.
The 5-0 Indiana Supreme Court decision made three key findings:
- The law passed by the Indiana General Assembly in 2021 barring class action COVID-19 suits doesn’t violate the constitutional separation of powers.
- The student doesn’t have the right to sue on behalf of others.
- The law doesn’t unconstitutionally impair the student because he can still pursue individual claims against Ball State.
The lawsuit estimated as many as 20,000 Ball State students were due some sort of reimbursement.
The General Assembly, however, enacted a retroactive law in 2021 that prohibited class-action complaints against state universities related to COVID-19. Instead, Mellowitz — and any other students impacted — would have to file individual suits.
Wednesday’s ruling said the legislature didn’t encroach on judicial powers because the law’s scope was limited to a narrow category of COVID-19 claims and had a public policy objective — “reducing postsecondary educational institutions’ litigation exposure for their emergency responses to the pandemic.”
The decision also reinforced that Mellowitz can sue for his own damages — but isn’t entitled to class-action status on behalf of other students.
During oral arguments in the case, his attorney said individual suits aren’t feasible due to only a few thousand dollars being at stake.
“The purpose of a class action is … to provide a remedy where often the claims are too small to even viably gain counsel,” he said. “As shown in this case, the defense of Ball State is vigorous.”
