Doe v. Worcester Public Schools, 143 N.E.3d 415

A Worcester high school student (Jane Doe) was suspended 152 school days after marijuana and two makeshift pipes were found in her locker; the principal treated this as an expulsion under G. L. c. 71, § 37H(a).
Doe appealed to the superintendent as § 37H(d) provides; the superintendent’s designee (the district school safety director) held the appeal and reduced the suspension to 112 days.
Doe sued, alleging the superintendent unlawfully delegated the statutory obligation to hear expulsion appeals, and moved for a preliminary injunction seeking immediate reinstatement to her regular high school.
The Superior Court granted the preliminary injunction; the defendants appealed to the SJC, which transferred and heard the case.
The SJC held § 37H(d) unambiguous: expelled students have a right to appeal to and to a hearing before the superintendent personally (no designee), distinguished § 37H 3/4 (which expressly permits a designee), declined to defer to the Department’s contrary interpretation, and affirmed the injunction because Doe showed likely success and irreparable harm.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a superintendent may delegate the § 37H(d) appeal/hearing to a designee	§ 37H(d) guarantees an appeal to and a hearing before the superintendent personally; no designee permitted	The superintendent may delegate this function (department interpretation); practical necessity and resource concerns	Court: § 37H(d) is plain and requires the superintendent personally; delegation not permitted; affirmed injunction
Whether agency deference requires accepting the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s interpretation	No—statute is unambiguous so no deference	Agency interpretation is reasonable and should be deferred to	Court: statute unambiguous; Chevron-type deference not applicable; court will not add words to statute
Whether preliminary injunction was appropriate (irreparable harm, balance of harms, public interest)	Doe: honors student, alternative school below grade level, prolonged exclusion causes irreparable educational harm	Defendants: risk to school safety and reoffending; contest some factual assertions	Court: Doe demonstrated likely success and irreparable harm; harms to school outweighed; injunction and reinstatement affirmed

Doe v. Superintendent of Sch. of Weston, 461 Mass. 159 (2011) (preliminary injunction standard in student-discipline context)
Packaging Indus. Group, Inc. v. Cheney, 380 Mass. 609 (1980) (elements required for preliminary injunction)
Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975) (due process considerations for long suspensions/expulsions)
Commonwealth v. Gagnon, 439 Mass. 826 (2003) (statutory construction: significance of express inclusion/exclusion)
Commonwealth v. Hamilton, 459 Mass. 422 (2011) (court will not supply omitted statutory language)
Casseus v. Eastern Bus Co., 478 Mass. 786 (2018) (primary goal: effectuate legislative intent)
Commonwealth v. LeBlanc, 475 Mass. 820 (2016) (clear and unambiguous statutory language is conclusive)