M.D. v. Department of Developmental Services
985 N.E.2d 863
Mass. App. Ct.2013Background
- Fermald Developmental Center will close as an ICF; interinstitutional transfer policy no longer subject to federal review.
- M.D. (born 1943) is moderately intellectually disabled with severe mental illness; resident at FDC since 1985 with an ISP.
- May 28, 2010 DDS gave guardians notice of transfer from FDC to Wrentham Developmental Center; guardians objected; case routed to DALA for hearing.
- Administrative magistrate found transfer would improve services and quality of life; guardians appealed to Superior Court under G. L. c. 30A.
- Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, addressing (1) scope of federal-law review, (2) Ricci III certification, (3) notice defect prejudice, (4) substantial-evidence support for best-interest transfer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the magistrate erred in limiting federal-law review | Guardians claim DDS violated ADA and Olmstead principles. | Magistrate narrowly limited to best-interest under c.123B; federal claims outside scope. | No error; proper statutory scope preserved. |
| Whether Ricci III certification applies to interinstitutional transfer | Certification required to protect Ricci class rights extended to transfers between facilities. | Certification not applicable to interinstitutional transfers by plain decree language. | Certification not required for interinstitutional transfer. |
| Whether defects in transfer notice prejudiced guardians | Notice failed to describe improvements, which prejudiced consent process. | Any defect cured; guardians received information; harmless error analysis applies. | Not prejudicial; cure and record support a nonreversible error finding. |
| Whether the magistrate's decision is supported by substantial evidence | Guardians emphasize drawbacks of WDC and benefits of FDC; evidence insufficient. | DDS presented substantial evidence of improvement and best interest in transfer. | Magistrate's decision supported by substantial evidence. |
| Whether pre-ITP/ISP meetings violated process | Informal process undermined guardian involvement before formal meeting. | Formal protections existed; guardians invited at ITP/ISP meeting; informal steps permissible. | Record supports that process complied; no reversible error. |
Key Cases Cited
- Box Pond Assn. v. Energy Facilities Siting Bd., 435 Mass. 408 (Mass. 2001) (agency interpretation of mandate reviewed for reasonableness)
- Olmstead v. L.C. ex rel. Zimring, 527 U.S. 581 (U.S. 1999) (integration requirement; no automatic transfer obligation)
- Ricci v. Patrick, 544 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2008) (disengagement order and Ricci class protections; transfer standards)
- Molly A. v. Commissioner of the Dept. of Mental Retardation, 69 Mass. App. Ct. 267 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007) (protective procedural due process in disability care transfers)