No. 23-1432

AMY RAE,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

WOBURN PUBLIC SCHOOLS; CITY OF WOBURN; MATTHEW CROWLEY, individually; CARL NELSON, individually,

Defendants, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Allison D. Burroughs, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Montecalvo, Lynch, and Rikelman, Circuit Judges.

Laurel J. Francoeur, with whom Francoeur Law Office was on brief, for appellant. Alexandra Milan Gill, with whom Douglas I. Louison and Louison, Costello, Condon & Pfaff, LLP were on brief, for appellees.

August 22, 2024 MONTECALVO, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-appellant Amy Rae is a school nurse who alleged that she was subject to retaliatory harassment while employed by defendant-appellee Woburn Public Schools ("WPS"). Rae specifically maintained that WPS's retaliation stemmed from her advocacy on behalf of students with disabilities and complaints she made to WPS regarding her own mistreatment. Although the alleged retaliation had been ongoing for over a decade, Rae first filed suit against WPS in November 2022 and raised four claims: (1) retaliatory harassment under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 ("Section 504"); (2) retaliatory harassment under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 ("ADA"); (3) employment discrimination in violation of Massachusetts's antidiscrimination statute, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151B, § 4 ("Chapter 151B"); and (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress.

On May 5, 2023, the district court dismissed the entirety of Rae's complaint, agreeing with WPS that Rae had failed to state any claims for which relief could be granted. For the reasons explained below, we agree with the district court that Rae cannot rely on the continuing violations doctrine to save her untimely discrimination claims, albeit on different grounds. We also affirm the district court's dismissal of Rae's timely state and federal discrimination claims, but we reach this conclusion for other reasons.

- 2 - I. Background

For purposes of summarizing the background underlying Rae's lawsuit against WPS, "we accept the well-pleaded facts as true, viewing factual allegations in the light most favorable" to Rae.1 Rederford v. U.S. Airways, Inc., 589 F.3d 30, 35 (1st Cir. 2009).

Since 2005, Rae has been a school nurse with WPS and was most recently employed at Kennedy Middle School ("Kennedy"). Rae alleges that defendant-appellee Carl Nelson, the Kennedy Principal, "has a disdain for students with disabilities[,] whom he considers weak and not deserving of special attention or funding." As such, when Rae requested additional resources to assist students with disabilities, she contends that "Nelson began to intimidate her, insisting students with disabilities 'should not be treated any differently than other students' and should not receive accommodations or services related to their conditions."

Beginning in October 2011, Rae expressed concerns that WPS lacked policies for treating students with diabetes and "began advocating for a diabetes policy to be implemented." Meanwhile, Nelson described students with diabetes as "lazy" and denied

1 Rae's complaint organizes her allegations into certain categories of conduct, but it does not include specific dates for many instances of the hostile treatment she allegedly experienced. We make reasonable inferences to discuss the allegations as chronologically as possible, while construing ambiguities in Rae's favor.