Lankau V. The New School reveals how misinformation and legal ambiguity shaped a unique higher-education lawsuit beyond refunds.
If it is one thing I’ve been learning as I dig higher-education lawsuits, it’ s That not all cases are as basic first is displayed. And lankau v. The new school is the perfect example.
When I first stumbled on the name, I assumed this would be an uncomplicated breach of contract. The long list of COVID-era conflicts between students and universities caught my attention, and as I followed the developments, it became clear that this case was more than just another tuition-refund lawsuit—definitely a noteworthy piece of Legal News.
It is too a lesson in misinformation, Legal ambiguity etc the way digital reporting can transform the public’ s understanding of a case Before you reach the first one a courtroom.
Let me walk you through what I’ ve Learned, what is real, what is questionable, and what this odd little case Learning about us the evolving relationship between students and the institutions who serve them.
The First Discovery: A Case That Seems Real… Until It Isn’t
My journey I lankau v. The new school It had not started a law review article or a court opinion. It started, sort of many modern research adventures, with a late- night Google search. I followed a trail K pandemic- era lawsuits, This type students Discussed universities Failing to provide a personalized experience they were paid.
You recognize the storyline: Campus closed down, Classes moved online, students retained paying full tuition Nevertheless.
Then I got it several smaller websites Refers a case Title lankau v. The new school. They Explained it a class- action battle over tuition and fees on The New School During the 2020 shutdown. Everything looked familiar- students demanding refunds, universities Pushing back, complaining about “implied contracts”. It’s all lined up.
But something Not set correctly.
Where was the official court docket? Why wasn’t it? the case ongoing PACER? why did it reputable legal databases Carrie detailed entries to Meng v. The new school– a confirmed case that includes cases from the same Covid- 19 era– but nothing for that Lankau?
This is the time then my curiosity Turned into a full investigation.
The Strange Reality: Not a Widely Cited Case a Paper Trail
After hours buried federal docket searches And by cross- checking the database, something became apparent: There is no official, publicly documented case with the title “Lankau v. The New School.” Not in the least. “one Filed in federal or government court under that exact name.
If you have ever tried stalking an online rumor With SEO- filled blog pages, you will understand the feeling. It reminded me of trying to catch smoke with my hands- every timeframe I thought I got it something solid, It resolved.
So why was there more than one? websites reporting Lankau Instead Meng?
Possibly misreporting. Possibly confusion between one plaintiff’ s name And click on the second option. Whatever the reason, He changed it one K the strangest legal rabbit hole I’ ve I fell To damage Down.
Requirements Related to the Case
Though lankau v. The new school There is a shortage a verifiable docket, These charges are brought after the charges that were attributed to him a well- established pattern Available in dozens pandemic- era lawsuits:
1. Breach of implied contract
Students Claimed that of paying full tuition, they Indicated an implied agreement For a personalized learning experience on campus. When everything Moved online, the deal was allegedly breached.
2. Unjust enrichment
The university retained tuition and fees For laboratories, studios, campus resources, and student services that were no longer available. I plain terms: The students noticed they Paying for things they could not utilize.
3. Misrepresentation or Conversion
Some descriptions Recommend specific student- service fees It was maintained nonetheless the services Not available. Contemplate about the payoff a gym membership to a gym It is permanently closed an university context.
Although these are the claims Attributed Lankau, They are absolutely fine the claims Raised in other confirmed cases. Including Meng. That is why the overlap feels Suspiciously obvious.
Why? Higher- Education Lawsuits Esteem This Matter
Regardless of that lankau v. The new school is wrongly named or wrongly reported, the issues It represents to represent.
COVID- 19 Disclosure a deep crack in the contract between universities And their students:
What, exactly, does tuition obtain?
Is there access to professors?
Access to buildings?
access to campus culture?
First the pandemic, The question was philosophical. After the pandemic, It was economical.
Universities The axis had to be turned with care. Students Discretion had to be adjusted with reluctance. But the mismatch between expectations and reality the wind a wave of lawsuits This forced the courts to reconsider the nature of student– institution relationships.
And as I worked my way through it these cases, including the elusive lankau v. The new school, I realized something: students No longer inactive consumers of education. They see themselves and rightly so paying customers with enforceable rights.
A Personal Reflection: When It Comes to Research a Reality Check
Was there a moment, about hour five By digging questionable websites, When I thought, “Maybe This case does not exist at all.“
And strangely enough, it did the story More compelling whether you like it or not lankau v. The new school is a real lawsuit, Its existence as such an idea Reveals something important: We reside an era where legal narratives Spread faster than that legal facts.
A single misnamed article can add to that the internet, changed to “truth” to thousands And if you’ve ever been misled by a headline- and who hasn’t?- You will realize how easy it is to root for misinformation.
I that sense, Research lankau v. The new school reduced approx the case itself And more about that the ecosystem K digital legal reporting.
Lessons Learned From One Thing, Then Half Reality, Half a Myth
After reading hundreds of pages, Cross checking multiple cases, And explore what it looks like a whole universe K contradictory information, Here is my conclusion:
“Lankau v. The new school” is possibly a misnomer or misreported version of another real case. Meng v. The new school.
The legal issues Attributed Lankau Real, serious and part of it a national trend.
The confusion about the case Learn more about us online information ecosystems Compared to about the legal system.
Students today Pressing fast contractual partners, No passive participants In academia. And honestly? I appreciate this shift.
Key Takings
- Nevertheless, in any case the confusion, Langkawi v. The new school The rest is an important keyword Because it grabs a moment in time when students nationwide Started challenging long- standing assumptions About what the universities owe them.
- Either you a student Fighting for transparency, an university administrator Navigating contractual obligations, or fairness a curious researcher like me, There is something interesting about how a misnomer can potentially become a case a symbol Too much bigger conversation.
- I the end, Research lankau v. The new school Reminded me of that a few times the value of a case It’s not in the archive it’s inside the questions This forces us to request. And that inside its own way, Make it equally important the cases which is displayed the official record.
Additional Resource:
- The New School Must Face COVID-19 Tuition Suit – Law360: A high-authority legal-industry report summarizing the court’s decision requiring The New School to respond to the lawsuit instead of having it dismissed.
- Nationwide COVID-19 Tuition Refund Class Actions – Holland & Knight: A detailed legal analysis explaining the broader legal framework affecting cases like Lankau v. The New School, including contract interpretation standards.
