COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
Dutra – Appellant
Versus
Trustees of Boston University – Respondent
No. 23-1385 JULIA DUTRA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; GABRIELLA DUBE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; SHAKURA COX, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; VALAAUINA SILULU, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; NATALIE SILULU, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; OLIVIA BORNSTEIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; VENUS TRAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY,
Defendant, Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Richard G. Stearns, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Gelpí, Lynch, and Howard, Circuit Judges.
Kathryn Lee Boyd, with whom Michael K. Eggenberger, Kristen L. Nelson, Hecht Partners LLP, Blake G. Abbott, Eric M. Poulin, Paul Doolittle, Roy T. Willey, Poulin Willey Anastopoulo, LLC, Patrick F. Madden, E. Michelle Drake, Berger Montague PC, Daniel J. Kurowski, Steve W. Berman, Whitney K. Siehl, Rachel A. Downey, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, Harold L. Lichten, Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C., Joseph I. Marchese, L. Timothy Fisher, Sarah N. Westcot, Bursor & Fisher, P.A., Michael C. Forrest, and Forrest, LaMothe, Mazoe, McCullough, Yasi & Yasi, were on brief, for appellants. Kathleen M. Sullivan, with whom Alex H. Loomis, Crystal Nix-Hines, Shon Morgan, Marina Lev, and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, were on brief, for appellee.
March 13, 2024 GELPÍ, Circuit Judge. This appeal requires us to analyze whether the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution is violated by the retroactive application to this case of Section 80 ("Law 80"), signed into law on August 9, 2023, by Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey through the state's 2024 Fiscal Year budget.
This appeal arises out of breach of contract claims filed against Boston University ("BU") by Olivia Bornstein, Shakura Cox, Gabriella Dube, Julia Dutra, Natalie Silulu, and Venus Tran (collectively, "Plaintiffs") for the remote instruction they received during the Spring 2020 semester. Plaintiffs alleged that BU committed a breach by transitioning to fully remote classes and services which they did not reasonably expect. Plaintiffs also alleged that BU was unjustly enriched by the transition.
Lengthy discovery and motion practice ensued, then summary judgment was entered below in favor of BU on the merits. In re Bos. Univ. COVID-19 Refund Litig., No. 20-10827, 2023 WL 2838379 (D. Mass. Apr. 7, 2023). Plaintiffs timely appealed, and soon thereafter, Law 80 was enacted. Law 80 is material to the instant case because it bars actions for damages and equitable monetary relief against higher education institutions for acts or omissions in response to the emergency of COVID-19 and orders ceasing in-person gatherings during the Spring 2020 academic semester, subject to four provisions. 2023 Mass. Acts, ch. 28, § 80(b). As its retroactive application does not violate due
- 3 - process, Law 80 bars this action. So holding, we affirm the district court's judgment below on this alternate ground.1
I. BACKGROUND
A. Relevant Facts
On March 10, 2020, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, former Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker limited gatherings to no more than ten people within the state.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.