Aljanal Carroll, et al. v. Walden University, LLC, et al

 Case Background

On January 15, 2022, Plaintiff  Aljanal Carroll filed a civil rights lawsuit in the United States District Court, Maryland State (Case number: 1:22-cv-00051). Julie R. Rubin presided over this case

Cause

In January 2022, Aljanal Carroll and two other Doctor of Business Administration (DBA) students filed a putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland against Walden University LLC and Walden e-Learning LLC. The Plaintiffs accused the Defendants of targeting, deceiving, and exploiting Black and female DBA program students. They alleged that Walden University falsely advertised the DBA program as one that could be completed within a “reasonable” timeframe and at a “reasonable” cost while concealing its actual financial and academic demands.

According to the complaint, the Defendants misrepresented the number of capstone credits required to complete the DBA program. This misrepresentation trapped students into paying for additional coursework, with each credit costing an average of $1,000.

In December 2022, Plaintiffs Carroll, Claudia Provost Charles, Tiffany Fair, and Tareion Fluker amended their complaint. They introduced class claims under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA). Carroll, Charles, and Fair also pursued individual claims under the Minnesota Prevention of Consumer Fraud Act, the Minnesota Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and claims for false advertising and fraudulent misrepresentation.

Injuries

The Plaintiffs alleged that Walden University’s misrepresentation of capstone credit requirements caused significant financial and emotional harm. Many students incurred unexpected student loans and payment plan debts, which far exceeded the anticipated cost of the DBA program. This financial burden disproportionately affected Black and female students, who claimed systemic discrimination in the program’s design and marketing practices. The lawsuit also argued that students spent more time in the capstone phase than expected due to arbitrary requirements for extra credits.

Damages

The Plaintiffs sought damages for the excessive costs caused by the Defendants’ deceptive practices. These included financial losses from additional capstone credit fees, inflated student loans, and the extended duration of the DBA program. The Plaintiffs also claimed emotional distress and hardship resulting from misleading representations about the program’s budget and timeline. They pursued compensation for both economic and non-economic damages.

 Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Aljanal Carroll | Claudia Provost Charles | Tiffany Fair | Tareion Fluker
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Alexa T. Milton | Glenn Schlactus | Tara K. Ramchandani | Lila R. Miller | Eric Rothschild
  • Defendant(s): Walden University LLC | Walden e-Learning LLC
    • Counsel for Defendants: Andrew D. Prins |  Eric R. Swibel | Sean M. Berkowitz

Claims

The Plaintiffs sought to certify three distinct classes:

Title VI Class:

Black students who enrolled in the DBA program between August 1, 2008, and January 31, 2018, and completed additional capstone credits beyond what was initially stated.

ECOA Black Student Class:

Black students from the same period who paid for extra credits using loans or payment plans.

ECOA Female Student Class:

Female students during the same timeframe who faced similar financial burdens.

The Plaintiffs asserted claims under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and ECOA, alleging racial and gender discrimination in DBA program costs and requirements. They also brought state law claims under Minnesota’s consumer fraud and trade practices statutes, citing violations related to false advertising and fraudulent misrepresentation.

Defense

Walden University denied targeting, deceiving, or exploiting Black and female DBA program students. The Defendants argued that the program’s structure, including the capstone phase, was transparent and communicated clearly to all students. They asserted that marketing materials accurately described the DBA program as rigorous and that variations in completion time or cost resulted from individual performance, not deceptive practices.

The Defendants maintained that capstone credit requirements aligned with academic standards and ensured the quality of doctoral research. They rejected allegations of racial or gender discrimination, claiming that all students received equal treatment and opportunities to succeed. Walden University further argued that financial hardships arose from personal circumstances, such as student loan terms, rather than institutional policies.

Regarding state law claims, the Defendants asserted that their advertising complied with consumer protection laws. They requested dismissal of the lawsuit, contending that Plaintiffs failed to prove intentional misrepresentation, fraud, or discriminatory practices.

Settlement

In March 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a motion to provisionally certify the settlement class and sought preliminary approval of a $28.5 million settlement agreement with Walden University. The Court granted the motion in April 2024.

Under the settlement terms, $7,125,000 (25% of the fund) was allocated for attorney fees and expenses, and up to $100,000 was reserved for third-party administration costs. Each of the four named Plaintiffs received $25,000 as an incentive award. The remaining settlement amount was distributed pro rata among class members based on the number of additional capstone credits they completed beyond the minimum required for the DBA program.

The settlement also included non-monetary relief. Walden University agreed to update its website with disclosures on the median time and cost of completing the DBA program for at least four years. Enrollment agreements were revised to include information about potential program length. Walden also eliminated a layer of review during the capstone phase and implemented measures to reduce both the time and cost of earning the degree.

On October 8, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion for final approval of the settlement. Judge Julie R. Rubin issued a final approval order on October 17, 2024, officially concluding the case. The settlement class included over 2,000 current and former DBA program students who met the criteria for one or more of the originally proposed classes.

Court Documents:

Available Upon Request