Jones v. Nova Southeastern University, Inc.
8:25-cv-00121
M.D. Fla.Aug 5, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Adewale Ebenezer Jones, a former medical student at Nova Southeastern University, was dismissed from the university after a series of disciplinary and psychological proceedings.
- Jones alleges he was falsely accused of misconduct, subjected to unfair hearings, and forced to undergo psychological evaluation without proper justification.
- He claims the university failed to protect him from discrimination and harassment, and wrongfully dismissed him on supposed academic grounds.
- Jones brought constitutional (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment) and breach of contract claims against the university, seeking reinstatement, injunctive relief, and substantial damages.
- The university moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing it failed to state a legally sufficient claim and that constitutional protections do not apply to private universities.
- The court reviewed the sufficiency of the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), noting procedural defects and a lack of specific factual allegations supporting the claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fourteenth Amendment Claim | University deprived Jones of due process in disciplinary procedures. | Not a state actor; constitutional claims inapplicable. | Dismissed; private university not subject to 14th Am. |
| Fifth Amendment Claim | University manipulated internal proceedings, violating due process. | Not a federal actor; constitutional claims inapplicable. | Dismissed; 5th Am. applies only to federal action. |
| Breach of Contract | University’s conduct constituted breach as a student and worker. | No contract or specific breach alleged in complaint. | Dismissed; no facts showing existence/breach of contract. |
| Complaint Sufficiency | Plaintiff pleads sufficient facts for relief, albeit in rambling form. | Complaint is confusing, unnumbered, and lacks clarity. | Dismissed with leave to amend for clarity and specificity. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (establishing 'plausibility' standard for pleadings)
- Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 (1974) (complaint’s well-pleaded facts accepted as true at motion to dismiss)
- Rickman v. Precisionaire, Inc., 902 F. Supp. 232 (M.D. Fla. 1995) (limiting review on motion to dismiss to the four corners of the complaint)
- Vega v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 564 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 2009) (elements required for breach of contract claim under Florida law)
- Friedman v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co., 985 So.2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (breach of contract standard)