Regardless of formerly revealing its intent to divert far from the benefits of the case and concentrate on the more comprehensive procedural problem, the Ohio Supreme Court invested a considerable piece of Tuesday’s oral arguments mulling whether Ohio State University is entitled to discretional resistance for its choice to close its school in the early days of the pandemic without supplying refunds to undergrads.
According to court files, Brooke Smith, a senior at OSU in the spring of 2020, submitted a suit after the university suspended all in-person classes and all on-campus activities in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Smith declared that she was just offered a partial refund for space and board and the leisure cost, however that the university decreased to provide refunds for any of the other costs, such as the training cost, nonresident additional charge, basic cost, trainee activity cost, trainee union center cost, discovering innovation cost, course costs, program costs, or the COTA bus cost.