## Facts

- Jayne G. Nathanson, a medical student applicant, had continuing back and neck injuries from a 1981 automobile accident.
- Nathanson applied to and was accepted by the Medical College of Pennsylvania (MCP), a private medical school receiving federal financial assistance.
- During the admissions process, Nathanson disclosed her accident and limitations, including that she needed nonstandard seating to take the MCAT.
- After matriculating in 1985, Nathanson experienced significant pain allegedly aggravated by MCP’s fixed classroom seating and walking distances associated with parking.
- Nathanson met with an assistant dean and reported severe muscle spasms and concern about continuing in the program; she contended she sought help with seating, parking, scheduling, and ultimately a deferral.
- MCP disputed that it understood Nathanson to be disabled within the meaning of § 504 or that it received sufficiently clear accommodation requests before she withdrew.
- Nathanson withdrew during her first year and later applied to other medical schools without disclosing her prior matriculation at MCP.
- MCP informed at least one other school (including Georgetown) that Nathanson had previously matriculated at MCP; Georgetown then withdrew her acceptance.
- Nathanson sued MCP for failure to accommodate under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and for tortious interference with her contractual and prospective relations with other schools.
- The district court granted summary judgment to MCP on all claims.

## Issues

1. Whether summary judgment was improper on the § 504 claim because material fact disputes existed as to (a) whether MCP had reason to know Nathanson was disabled and (b) whether MCP provided reasonable accommodation sufficient to afford meaningful access.
2. Whether MCP’s truthful disclosure of Nathanson’s prior matriculation to other medical schools could support tortious interference with existing or prospective contractual relations.

## Decision

- The court reversed summary judgment for MCP on the § 504 Rehabilitation Act claim and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held the record contained triable fact questions regarding MCP’s notice of Nathanson’s disability and the adequacy of MCP’s response to her accommodation-related complaints and requests.
- The court affirmed summary judgment for MCP on the tortious interference claims.
- The court concluded Nathanson failed to produce evidence of improper motive or wrongful conduct in MCP’s communications, which were essentially truthful and within normal institutional processes.

## Legal Principles

- A § 504 plaintiff must show: (1) a disability under the Act, (2) otherwise qualified status, (3) exclusion/denial of benefits or discrimination under the program, and (4) the program’s receipt of federal financial assistance.
- Recipients of federal funds must provide reasonable accommodations when needed to provide meaningful access to program benefits; compliance is not limited to physical access.
- For institutional notice under § 504, a student need not use formal terms (e.g., “handicapped”); the question is whether the institution had information that would reasonably put it on notice of a disabling condition.
- Summary judgment is improper where evidence could support findings that the institution had constructive notice of a disability and failed to take reasonable steps to accommodate.
- Truthful, routine communications between educational institutions about a student’s prior enrollment, absent proof of improper motive or wrongful means, do not establish tortious interference.

## Conclusion

The Third Circuit held that factual disputes about notice and reasonable accommodation required trial-level proceedings on Nathanson’s § 504 claim, while MCP’s truthful disclosure of her prior matriculation did not support tortious interference liability.


Nathanson v. Med. Coll. of Pa., 926 F.2d 1368 (3d Cir. 1991)