The University of Florida Class Action Lawsuit Settlement continues to draw attention from former students, legal observers, and higher education administrators. This ongoing litigation stems from claims that the University of Florida failed to provide certain on-campus services for which students paid mandatory fees during the 2020 COVID-19 campus shutdown. As of April 2026, no settlement has been reached, and the case remains active in the trial court. This article provides a factual overview of the lawsuit’s background, procedural developments, and current status based on court records and public reporting.
Background of the Lawsuit
In April 2021, Anthony Rojas, a former graduate student at the University of Florida, filed a class-action complaint in the Alachua County Circuit Court (Case No. 01-2021-CA-001124) against the University of Florida Board of Trustees. The suit alleges breach of contract related to mandatory student fees paid during the spring and summer 2020 semesters.
These fees covered services such as student activities and services, transportation, health care, and athletics. Plaintiffs contend that when the university closed on-campus facilities and shifted to remote learning in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, students received little or no access to these services yet received no refunds or credits for the unused portions. The complaint seeks to represent a class of similarly situated students who paid the fees during the relevant periods. Notably, the lawsuit does not involve tuition refunds but focuses solely on these auxiliary fees.
This type of claim reflects common contractual disputes in higher education during emergency campus closures. Students and universities enter into implied or express agreements through fee schedules and enrollment terms, and courts often examine whether those terms created enforceable obligations for service delivery.
Procedural History and Key Court Rulings
The case followed a standard path through Florida’s court system before reaching its current stage. The trial court initially dismissed the unjust enrichment claim but allowed the breach of contract claim to proceed, finding that sovereign immunity did not bar the action at the pleading stage.
On appeal, the First District Court of Appeal reversed that decision. It held that the university’s sovereign immunity shielded it from the suit because the contract language did not contain sufficiently explicit waivers for claims based on implied terms.
The Florida Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction to resolve a certified question of great public importance. In a 5-2 decision issued on July 17, 2025 (Rojas v. University of Florida Board of Trustees, SC2023-0126), the high court quashed the appellate decision. The majority opinion clarified that once a state university enters into an express written contract authorized by statute, sovereign immunity does not prevent claims alleging breach of implied covenants or conditions, provided those implied obligations do not contradict the contract’s express provisions.
The Florida Supreme Court emphasized established principles of Florida contract law and sovereign immunity waivers. State universities possess statutory authority to enter contracts and may be sued when those contracts are breached. The ruling did not address the merits of the refund claims or determine liability; it simply held that the case could advance past the motion-to-dismiss stage.
Following the decision, the University of Florida filed a motion for rehearing on July 31, 2025. The university withdrew that motion on August 28, 2025, allowing the mandate to issue and the case to return to the Alachua County Circuit Court for further proceedings.
Current Status of the University of Florida Class Action Lawsuit Settlement
As of April 2026, the University of Florida Class Action Lawsuit Settlement has not been finalized or announced. The case has resumed in the trial court following the lifting of any prior stays. Proceedings now focus on next steps such as class certification under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.220, discovery, and potential dispositive motions. No trial date has been set, and court dockets indicate ongoing activity consistent with pre-trial litigation.
Class certification remains a critical threshold issue. If granted, the class could include thousands of former UF students who paid the relevant mandatory fees during the 2020 shutdown periods. Certification would allow the court to determine liability and damages (if any) on a class-wide basis rather than through individual suits.
Universities facing similar claims sometimes explore settlement to manage litigation costs and provide closure for affected students. However, no settlement agreement has been reported in this matter, and any negotiations, if occurring, would remain confidential at this stage.
Legal Principles Involved
Sovereign immunity protects Florida governmental entities, including public universities, from suit unless waived by statute or express contract. Florida law authorizes state universities to contract and subjects them to suit for breach. The Florida Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling addressed the scope of such waivers, particularly regarding implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing that courts routinely read into contracts.
This distinction between express and implied terms is a cornerstone of Florida contract jurisprudence. The decision aligns with precedent requiring courts to honor contractual obligations once a valid contract exists, while preserving the state’s immunity for purely tort or statutory claims without contractual foundation.
Class actions in Florida require plaintiffs to demonstrate numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. In fee-refund cases, commonality often centers on uniform fee policies and campus-wide shutdown decisions.
Potential Implications for Affected Students
Former students who paid the disputed fees during the spring and summer 2020 semesters may eventually receive notice if the court certifies a class and approves any future settlement or judgment. Eligibility would depend on specific payment records and enrollment status at the time.
Any recovery, whether through settlement or verdict, would likely involve prorated refunds based on the value of unused services. Exact amounts would require further litigation or negotiation. Students should retain records of fee payments and monitor official university communications or court notices for updates.
This case does not affect current UF students or unrelated fee disputes. It is limited to the 2020 COVID-19 shutdown period described in the complaint.
Broader Context of COVID-Era University Refund Litigation
Similar fee-refund class actions were filed against several Florida public universities following the 2020 campus closures. Outcomes have varied by jurisdiction, with some cases dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds and others proceeding after appellate review. The Rojas decision provides guidance for these parallel matters and underscores the importance of clear contractual language in student fee policies.
Nationally, courts have addressed analogous higher-education disputes under state contract and consumer-protection laws. These cases highlight the tension between institutional flexibility during emergencies and students’ reasonable expectations of service delivery when fees are mandator.
You May Also Like: Edward Jones Kingsview Advisors Lawsuit: High-Stakes Settlements & Precedents
Disclaimer:
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers with questions about their eligibility or rights should consult a qualified attorney licensed in Florida. Court records and official filings provide the authoritative source for case details. The status of the University of Florida Class Action Lawsuit Settlement may evolve, and interested parties should monitor developments through the Alachua County Circuit Court or reliable news sources.