## Facts

- Jane Doe enrolled at New York University School of Medicine in 1975 with a history of serious psychiatric illness and self-harming behavior.
- In her medical school application, Doe denied prior chronic illness or emotional problems and did not disclose prior psychiatric hospitalizations.
- After matriculation, a required medical exam revealed scars; Doe disclosed her psychiatric history and self-mutilation.
- After consultation with school officials and physicians, Doe took a leave of absence, with an understanding she could seek reinstatement if she could show she could (1) withstand medical-school stress, (2) function as a physician, and (3) avoid significant risk of recurrence of dangerous or disruptive behavior.
- During leave, Doe did not consistently participate in psychotherapy.
- In 1977, Doe applied for readmission and submitted psychiatrists’ letters supporting her return.
- NYU obtained contrary expert opinions stating Doe’s condition carried a significant possibility of relapse and posed safety risks to herself, other students, and future patients.
- NYU denied readmission.

## Issues

1. Whether Doe satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction compelling readmission, including irreparable harm and likelihood of success (or serious questions plus a balance of hardships strongly favoring her).
2. Whether, on the record at the preliminary-relief stage, Doe showed a likelihood of proving she was an “otherwise qualified handicapped individual” excluded “solely by reason of” handicap under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit reversed the order granting a preliminary injunction requiring NYU to readmit Doe.
- The court held Doe did not show irreparable injury from denial or delay of readmission sufficient to justify extraordinary relief.
- The court held Doe did not show a likelihood of success on the merits because evidence supported NYU’s view that she posed a significant risk of relapse and was not otherwise qualified for medical training.
- The court indicated the district court gave inadequate weight to NYU’s professional, safety-based academic judgment in a medical-education context.

## Legal Principles

- A preliminary injunction requires irreparable harm and either (a) likelihood of success on the merits or (b) serious questions going to the merits plus a balance of hardships tipping decidedly toward the movant.
- Under § 504, it is not enough to show a disability; the plaintiff must prove she is “otherwise qualified” to meet essential program requirements despite the disability.
- The plaintiff bears the burden to show she is otherwise qualified and that exclusion was “solely by reason of” handicap rather than legitimate qualification and safety concerns.
- In professional programs implicating safety and competence (such as medicine), courts give substantial deference to an institution’s reasonable, expert-based academic judgment, and a significant risk of harmful recurrence may render an applicant not otherwise qualified.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit vacated an injunction compelling medical-school readmission because Doe failed to show irreparable harm and failed, on the record presented, to demonstrate a likelihood of proving she was otherwise qualified under § 504 in light of NYU’s expert-supported assessment of a significant relapse and safety risk.


Doe v. N.Y.U., 666 F.2d 761 (2d Cir. 1981)