933 F. Supp. 2d 214
D. Mass.2013Background
- Fay School is a private MA boarding/day school with ~450 students and a two-tier discipline system.
- DMP, diagnosed with ADHD, attended Fay 2009-2011 and was placed on social and then final probation for disciplinary issues.
- Handbook and enrollment contract govern Fay’s core values, discipline procedures, and potential sanctions.
- DMP’s medical treatment included Amantadine; Fay allowed a temporary adjustment for medication in 2010-2011.
- In 2011, DMP admitted to two major rules violations (cheating and lying) while on final probation and was expelled; parents withdrew him for medical reasons; DMP later attended another school.
- DMP sues Fay under ADA Title III for failure to reasonably accommodate him and for breach of contract; Fay seeks summary judgment.
- Court must address mootness, disability/qualification, accommodation requests, and whether Handbook creates a binding contract.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the ADA claim moot after DMP began attending another school? | DMP contends ongoing harm via transcript notation. | Expulsion mootness defeats injunctive relief. | ADA claim moot; but court would deny on other grounds if not moot. |
| Was DMP disabled and qualified for accommodation under ADA? | DMP disabled within ADA; sought reasonable accommodation. | Disciplinary issues unconnected to disability; not qualified with requested accommodation. | Assumed disabled, but failed to show reasonable accommodation or qualification. |
| Did Fay breach the contract by expelling without DC hearing? | Handbook creates binding contract with hearing before expulsion. | Head of School can expel; DC hearing not mandatory in all cases. | Genuine issue of material fact as to adherence to procedures; summary judgment denied. |
| Were the claimed accommodations reasonable, and did Fay have discretion to deny them? | Requested day status and better medication compliance. | Accommodations failed to remedy disciplinary problems; not reasonable. | Court doubts reasonableness of accommodations; still unresolved. |
Key Cases Cited
- Axelrod v. Phillips Acad., 46 F. Supp. 2d 72 (D. Mass. 1999) (reasonableness of accommodations; school discipline context)
- Bercovitch v. Baldwin School, 133 F.3d 141 (1st Cir. 1998) (contractual nature of handbook; not superfluous to educational environment)
- Driscoll v. Bd. of Trustees of Milton Academy, 70 Mass. App. Ct. 285 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007) (private school discretion in discipline; arbitration of policy)
- Coveney v. President & Trustees of College of Holy Cross, 388 Mass. 16 (Mass. 1983) (schools’ rules are integral; not arbitrary in discipline decisions)
- Goodwin v. C.N.J., Inc., 436 F.3d 44 (1st Cir. 2006) (case-or-controversy requirement persists; mootness analysis)