Verified Complaint — Gauvin v. Wachusett Youth Football and Cheer, Inc. (Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG, Document 2-3)

Summary

Document 2-3 in Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG, filed October 14, 2025, a 96-page set of papers from the Worcester Superior Court in Massachusetts in a suit by Michelle Gauvin and Jeffrey Berkowitz against Wachusett Youth Football and Cheer, Inc. It opens with a summons and order of notice and a civil action cover sheet, filed in that court on October 3, 2025, that names plaintiffs' attorney Peter S. Farrell and gives the action type as D03 Injunction. The closing pages are a motion under Mass. R. Civ. P. 65 for a preliminary injunction against the organization. The motion states that, as set forth in the Verified Complaint, WYFC excluded the plaintiffs' children from youth football and issued coercive threats against their parents, which it calls unlawful discrimination and retaliation.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, 55.

SUPERIOR COURT
DEPARTMENT OF THE
TRIAL COURT

CIVIL ACTION

(Ylichelle Gaui end Te No. AS FSCy1F29.B
SUMMONS AND

Sen _, ORDER OF NOTICE

aon a ea aaa Defendant(s) MOE on,

To the secede Defendant: "SSE

You are age seul fe and required to serve upon “Ree,

, Plaintiff's attorney, whose add

| TEA ok’ LA .@ A / qe! é -i E/T | ‘ Sy — 2 Dd ALT & MA
an answer to the complaint which is he SSR Rea A 0 days after service of this ©2383 >
pvblpiciicisiesih te Deverell slr ca ammeter at be

So" e nen rt =i as —— pews SeOWNUTT’S ai corm =y

within a peasonahie e Sone =

ot ee Se et

Unless otherwise provided by Rule 13 (a), your answer must state as a counterclaim any claim
which you may have against the plaintiff which arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the

subject matter of the plaintiff's claim, or you will thereafter be barred from making such claim in any
other action.

WE ALSO NOTIFY YOU that application has been made in said action, as appears in the

_ compiaint, for a preliminary injunction and that a hearing upon such application will be held at the court
ae _ _house at said Worcester in the Civil___ session hnysfouyseid
oe A D200 at_cl:00 croc
AML | ee rece Ow CoUSe Wry sed =e aL ae not be granted.

ee ors at Worcester, the et eee Ole

i

Clerk of Courts

houl apenas ©
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 2 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number DOCKET NUMBER Massachusetts TripeC quit
CIVIL ACTION COVER SHEET Superior Court 7 LED
COUNTY|Worcester Superior Court (Worcester)
Plaintiff Michelle Gauvin & Jeffrey Berkowitz Defendant: Wachusett Youth Football and Cheer
ADDRESS: 35 Birchwood Drive ADDRESS: 24 Sycamore Drive
Holden, MA 01520 Rutland, MA 01543
Plaintiff Attorney: Peter S. Farrell Defendant Attorney:
ADDRESS: 46 Railroad Avenue, Suite 204 ADDRESS:
Duxbury, MA 02332
BBO: 656512 BBO:
TYPE OF ACTION AND TRACK DESIGNATION (see instructions section on next page)
CODE NO. TYPE OF ACTION (specify) TRACK HAS A JURY CLAIM BEEN MADE?
DO3 Injunction F YES [ ] No
*If "Other" please describe:
Is there a claim under G.L. c. 93A? Is there a class action under Mass. R. Civ,P,,23?
[| YES NO | YES NO (

STATEMENT OF DAMAGES REQUIRED BY G.L. c. 212, § 3A

The following is a full, itemized and detailed statement of the facts on which the undersigned plaintiff or plaintiffs counsel relies to determine money damages.
(Note to plaintiff: for this form, do not state double or treble damages; indicate single damages only.)
TORT CLAIMS

A. Documented medical expenses to date

1. Total hospital expenses

2. Total doctor expenses

3. Total chiropractic expenses

4. Total physical therapy expenses

5. Total other expenses (describe below)

Subtotal (1-5): $0.00
B. Documented lost wages and compensation to date
C. Documented property damages to date
D. Reasonably anticipated future medical and hospital expenses
E. Reasonably anticipated lost wages
F. Other documented items of damages (describe below)
| TOTAL (A-F): $0.00

G. Briefly describe plaintiff's injury, including the nature and extent of the injury:

CONTRACT CLAIMS
| This action includes a claim involving collection of a debt incurred pursuant to a revolving credit agreement. Mass. R. Civ. P. 8.1(a).

Item # Detailed Description of Each Claim Amount
1.

Total

Signature of Attorney/Self-Represented Plaintiff: X Peter S. Farrell | | Date: 10-02-2025

RELATED ACTIONS: Please provide the case number, case name, and county of any related actions pending in the Superior Court.

CERTIFICATION UNDER §&.J.C. RULE 1:18(5)
| hereby certify that | have complied with requirements of Rule 5 of Supreme Judicial Court Rule 1:18: Uniform Rules on Dispute Resolution, requiring that | inform my clients about
court-connected dispute resolution services and discuss with them the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods of dispute resolution.

Signature of Attorney: X Peter S. Farrell | | Date: 10-02-25

$C0001: 02/24 www.mass.gov/courts Date/Time Printed:10-02-2025 10:10:28
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

Filed 10/14/25 Page 3 of 96

CIVIL ACTION COVER SHEET INSTRUCTIONS —

SELECT A CATEGORY THAT BEST DESCRIBES YOUR CASE*

AC Actions Involving the State/Municipality t*

AA1 Contract Action involving Commonwealth,

Municipality, MBTA, etc. (A)
AB1 Tortious Action involving Commonwealth,
Municipality, MBTA, etc. (A)

AC1 Real Property Action involving
Commonwealth, Municipality, MBTA etc. (A)

AD1 Equity Action involving Commonwealth,
Municipality, MBTA, etc. (A)

AE1 Administrative Action involving
Commonwealth, Municipality, MBTA,etc. (A)

CN Contract/Business Cases

A01 Services, Labor, and Materials F)
A02 Goods Sold and Delivered F)
A03 Commercial Paper F)
A04 Employment Contract F)

(
(
(
(
A05 Consumer Revolving Credit - mrc.p.3.1  (F)
(
(
(
(

A06 Insurance Contract F)
A08 Sale or Lease of Real Estate F)
A12 Construction Dispute A)
A14 Interpleader F)

BA1 Governance, Conduct, Internal

Affairs of Entities (A)
BAS Liability of Shareholders, Directors,

Officers, Partners, etc. (A
BB1 Shareholder Derivative (A)
BB2 Securities Transactions A
BCi Mergers, Consolidations, Sales of

Assets, Issuance of Debt, Equity, etc. (A)

BD1 Intellectual Property (A)
BD2 Proprietary Information or Trade

Secrets (A)
BG1 Financial Institutions/Funds (A)

BH1 Violation of Antitrust or Trade
Regulation Laws (A)
A99 Other Contract/Business Action - Specify (F)

* See Superior Court Standing Order 1-88 for an
explanation of the tracking deadlines for each track
designation: F, A, and X. On this page, the track
designation for each case type is noted in
parentheses.

t* Choose this case type if ANY party is the
Commonwealth, a municipality, the MBTA, or any
other governmental entity UNLESS your case is a
case type listed under Administrative Civil Actions
(AA).

t Choose this case type if ANY party is an
incarcerated party, UNLESS your case is a case
type listed under Administrative Civil Actions (AA)
or is a Prisoner Habeas Corpus case (E97).

ER Equitable Remedies

DO01 Specific Performance of a Contract (A
D02 Reach and Apply (
DO3 Injunction (
D04 Reform/ Cancel Instrument (
D05 Equitable Replevin (
D06 Contribution or Indemnification (
DO07 Imposition of a Trust (A
D08 Minority Shareholder's Suit (A
DO9 Interference in Contractual Relationship (
D10 Accounting ¢
D11 Enforcement of Restrictive Covenant (
D12 Dissolution of a Partnership (
D13 Declaratory Judgment, G.L.c. 231A ¢
D14 Dissolution of a Corporation (
D99 Other Equity Action (

F
F
F
F
F
F
A
F
F
A

F
F

PA Civil Actions Involving Incarcerated Party *

PA1 Contract Action involving an

Incarcerated Party (A)
PB1 Tortious Action involving an

Incarcerated Party (A)
PC1 Real Property Action involving an

Incarcerated Party (F)
PD1 Equity Action involving an

Incarcerated Party (F)
PE1 Administrative Action involving an

Incarcerated Party (F)

TR Torts

B03 Motor Vehicle Negligence - Personal
Injury/Property Damage

B04 Other Negligence - Personal
Injury/Property Damage

B05 Products Liability

B06 Malpractice - Medical

B07 Malpractice - Other

B08 Wrongful Death - Non-medical

B15 Defamation

B19 Asbestos

B20 Personal Injury - Slip & Fall

B21 Environmental

B22 Employment Discrimination

BE1 Fraud, Business Torts, etc.

B99 Other Tortious Action

3

FSAIDSSSSSSI

RP Summary Process (Real Property)

$01 Summary Process - Residential (X)
$02 Summary Process - Commercial/
Non-residential (F)

RP Real Property

C01 Land Taking

C02 Zoning Appeal, G.L. c. 40A
C03 Dispute Concerning Title

C04 Foreclosure of a Mortgage
C05 Condominium Lien & Charges
C99 Other Real Property Action

BREDIS

MC Miscellaneous Givil Actions
E18 Foreign Discovery Proceeding (%)
E97 Prisoner Habeas Corpus xX
E22 Lottery Assignment, G.L. c. 10, § 28 (%)

AB Abuse/Harassment Prevention

E15 Abuse Prevention Petition, G.L.c. 209A (X)
E21 Protection from Harassment, G.L. c. 258E(X)

AA Administrative Civil Actions

E02 Appeal from Administrative Agency,
G.L.c. 30A

E03 Certiorari Action, G.L. ¢. 249, § 4

E05 Confirmation of Arbitration Awards

E06 Mass Antitrust Act, G.L.c. 93, § 9

E07 Mass Antitrust Act, G.L.c. 93, §8

E08 Appointment of a Receiver

E09 Construction Surety Bond, G.L. c. 149,
§§ 29, 29A

E10 Summary Process Appeal

E11 Worker's Compensation

E16 Auto Surcharge Appeal

E17 Civil Rights Act, G.L.¢.12, § 11H

E24 Appeal from District Court
Commitment, G.L. ¢.123, § 9(b)

E94 Forfeiture, G.L. c. 265, § 56

E95 Forfeiture, G.L. c. 94C, § 47

E99 Other Administrative Action

201 Medical Malpractice - Tribunal only,
GL. c. 231, § 60B

202 Appeal Bond Denial

RARR FSRRRE RRERRR

BS

SO Sex Offender Review

E12 SDP Commitment, G.L. c. 123A, § 12
E14 SDP Petition, G.L. c. 123A, § 9(b)

BS

RC Restricted Civil Actions

E19 Sex Offender Registry, G.L. c. 6, § 178M (X)
E27 Minor Seeking Consent, G.L. ¢.112, § 12S(X)

TRANSFER YOUR SELECTION TO THE FACE SHEET

EXAMPLE:
CODE NO. TYPE OF ACTION (specify) TRACK HAS A JURY CLAIM BEEN MADE?
BO3 Motor Vehicle Negligence-Personal Injury FU. YES L] NO

STATEMENT OF DAMAGES REQUIRED BY G.L. c. 212, § 3A

DUTY OF THE PLAINTIFF — On the face of the Civil Action Cover Sheet (or on attached additional sheets, if necessary), the plaintiff shall
state the facts on which the plaintiff relies to determine money damages. A copy of the completed Civil Action Cover Sheet, including the
statement concerning damages, shall be served with the complaint. A clerk-magistrate shall not accept for filing a complaint, except as
otherwise provided by law, unless it is accompanied by such a statement signed by the attorney or self-represented litigant.

DUTY OF THE DEFENDANT — If the defendant believes that the statement of damages filed by the plaintiff is inadequate, the defendant may
file with the defendant's answer a statement specifying the potential damages which may result if the plaintiff prevails.

A CIVIL ACTION COVER SHEET MUST BE FILED WITH EACH COMPLAINT.
IF THIS COVER SHEET IS NOT FILLED OUT THOROUGHLY AND
ACCURATELY, THE CASE MAY BE DISMISSED.

$C0001: 02/24 Date/Time Printed:10-02-2025 10:10:28

www.mass.gov/courts
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 4 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E-FILED

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss. SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT
C.A. No.:

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY BERKOWITZ,
individually and as parents and next friends of their
minor children

Plaintiffs,

V.
WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL AND

CHEER, INC.,
Defendant.

(2)

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

I. PARTIES

1. Michelle Gauvin and Jeffery Berkowitz (“Plaintiffs”) are domestic partners and adults
residing in Worcester County, Massachusetts. Ms. Gauvin is the parent and legal
guardian of three minor children (“Child 1-3”), two of whom are minor children
diagnosed with Autism (“Child 1” and “Child 2” respectively.) Child 3 is not
diagnosed with autism. Mr. Berkowitz is a parent of a minor child (“Child 4’) that is
also part of the allegations set forth herein. Child 4 is not diagnosed with autism. Mr.
Berkowitz is also the step-parent of Children 1-3.

2. As an individual diagnosed with Autism, Child 1 is an individual with a disability as
defined by state and federal law.

3. Defendant, Wachusett Youth Football and Cheer, Inc. (““WYFC”), is a Massachusetts
nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the Commonwealth, operating youth

football and cheerleading programs in Worcester County, Massachusetts, with a
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 5 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

principal address of 24 Sycamore Drive, Rutland, MA 01543 and is subject to suit in
this Court.

I. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

4. In or about July 2025, the Plaintiff , Michelle Gauvin, entered into a contract with the
Defendant, WYFC, for her son, Child 1, to play youth football. A true and accurate
copy of the contract is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

5. Entering into said contract and paying the registration fee of $300 as well as submitting
other forms were conditions precedent to the Plaintiff's minor children participating in
youth football with WYFC.

6. Plaintiffs have other children that played in the WYFC that were affected by the
Defendant’s actions set forth in this complaint.

7. According to its website, Defendant WYFC “is a non-profit youth sports organization
that supports youth athletes who reside in the Wachusett region, located in
Massachusetts. Towns supported are Holden, Paxton, Princeton, Rutland, and Sterling.
We have options for all ages from 5 years to 13 years old. We offer multiple sports
including Tackle Football, Flex (flag) Football, and Competitive Cheer!”

8. WYFC does not have a selective process for admittance of youth to play football and
solicits the general public to the organization without exclusion.

9. WYFC offers and runs its programs at the Griffin Road Athletic Complex (“GRAC”)
located on Griffin Road in the town of Sterling, Worcester County, Massachusetts

01564.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 6 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM

Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

According to its website, WYFC leases, rents, is gifted or licensed to use the GRAC
by the Town of Sterling , a municipality and municipally owned lands within and for
Worcester County within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Under G.L. c. 272, § 92A, a "place of public accommodation" is defined as any place,
whether licensed or unlicensed, that is open to and accepts or solicits the patronage of
the general public, including a broad range of establishments like hotels, restaurants,
stores, theaters, museums, libraries, hospitals, and service establishments, as well as
common areas of buildings and public transportation facilities. and is thus a place of
public accommodation.

WYFC is a place of public accommodation and is subject to the provisions of G.L. c.
272, §§ 92A, 98, 98A, better known as the Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law.
Similarly, GRAC is a place of public accommodation pursuant to the same statute.
Despite his disability and Autism diagnosis, Child 1 participated in youth football with
WYFC for the last three years, without incident, since approximately 2022, with the
same or similar group of peers, players, and coaches. 2025 would have been Child 1’s
fourth consecutive year playing football with WYFC.

Prior to this year, Mr. Berkowitz served as a volunteer and coach for his children with
WYFC.

Additionally, Child 1’s grandfather volunteered as a football coach to coach Child 1.
The Plaintiff’s family have participated in and supported WYFC for several years.

For reasons that remain unknown and for unspecified reasons, neither Berkowitz nor
Child 1’s grandfather were permitted by the Defendant to volunteer to coach this year

despite their heavy involvement and presence in prior years without incident.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 7 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM

Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

19.

20.

21.

22.

As a condition precedent for playing football, the Plaintiffs were required to submit a
number of “registration forms” including medical clearance for their children to play
football.

At all times relevant, Child 1 was medically cleared by his pediatrician or other
clinician to play football which is consistent with his past three years of membership
and history with the other players and coaches of WYFC.

Beginning in July 2025, Child 1 resumed participation in summer practices with his
team. He attended practices regularly and played without incident through early
September 2025.

On or about July 27, 2025, Child 1’s step-parent, Mr. Berkowitz wrote to WYFC
President, John Mandracchia, regarding an incident that occurred with the Football
Director, Ben Bachant:

I'm writing to express my concern about an incident that occurred with Ben,
the football director, on July 24, 2025. At approximately 5:40 PM, | was on the
field throwing a football with my son and my step-sons. During that time, | had
to discipline my son in a manner that was appropriate to the situation.

To my surprise, Ben yelled across the field, stating that | could not “yell” at my
Son. i.want to be clear that | was not acting inappropriately and was. well within.
my rights as a parent. Ben then proceeded to say that! “wasn't supposed to be
on the field," even though this occurred before practice began.

‘His public remarks were unwarranted and, frankly, felt more like intimidation or
bullying than constructive communication.

At the first practice, Ben clearly stated that coaches would be held to the same
standards as parents, with a zero-tolerance policy for inappropriate behavior.
Unfortunately, his actions during this incident did not reflect those standards.
As you know, both WYFC and CMYF maintain zero-tolerance policies
-regarding bullying, and. believe this situation falls within that category.

A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 2A.

4
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 8 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM

Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

On July 30, 2025, Mandracchia responded, in part:

After reviewing all perspectives, I've determined that there is not enough evidence to
conclude that Ben's.actions rose to. the level. of bullying. However,.| have addressed your.
concerns with him directly and reminded him of the importance of maintaining a
respectful and professional tone in all interactions—especially when speaking in front of
‘others,

WYFCC Vice President Tom Galvin, who is cc'd on this email, has been on the field
everyday. Please inform him or myself immediately if there is any future conflict with Ben.

A true and accurate copy of the response is attached hereto as Exhibit 2B.

On September 2, 2025, Coach Patterson (father of Player 1) accused Plaintiff, Mr.
Berkowitz of “abusing” Ms. Gauvin’s younger son (““Child 3”) while disciplining him.
On September 3, 2025, Football Director Ben Bachant made remarks that specifically
implied Child 1 was not suitable to play football based on his disability (autism)
including: “Doesn’t seem like he wants to be here”; “Doesn’t put in much effort”; “Ts
unsafe on the line”; “He freezes on the line and is a danger to himself”; “Is he mentally
mature enough to be on a team?”; and “What if he has a breakdown on the field?”
These remarks were made the day after Child 1’s head coach, Jarred Louchart, praised
the child on September 2 for his hard work, progress, and positive attitude.

On September 3, 2025, at approximately 1:41 p.m. WYFC President John
Mandracchia telephoned the Plaintiffs and stated that Child 1 could not attend practice
because of “multiple complaints from last week,” but provided no details.

Prior to this time, Player 1 (son of Coach Patterson) and Player 2 have repeatedly

bullied Child 1 by throwing him to the ground and telling him, “you suck” and “you

' A pseudonym.

? Also a pseudonym.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 9 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM

Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

don’t belong.” Despite Plaintiff’s formal complaints, WYFC took no action against
those players.
While this behavior went unaddressed and no sanction was meted out, WYFC
immediately excluded Child 1 based on unverified allegations.
Player 1 and Player 2 were treated differently than Child 1.
Upon information and belief, Player 1 and Player 2 do not have a disability.
Despite this behavior and conduct and WYFC’s “Code of Conduct,” upon information
and belief, neither Player 1 nor Player 2 suffered any consequences for this behavior
targeting Child | based on his disability.
This is disparate treatment based on disability.
On September 3, 2025 at 2:12 PM, Mr. Berkowitz followed up with Manadracchia
following the telephone conversation carlicr and to address Coach Patterson and the
incident that occurred on September 2:
Towards the end of practice last night | was having a discussion with my step son. He had
kicked over a a couple water bottles and his mother had asked him to pick itup and he
snapped back at her and said “NO! i'm not picking it up”. | turned back to Jarneson and
told him “enough with the back talk" (as this has been an on going behavioral issue). |
then explained that “the back talk is not acceptable from the older 3 (his brothers and my
son} and it's not acceptable from him either. | asked if he understood and while looking at
the ground and jumping around, | grabbed his arm to hold him still and asked him to
make eye contact with me because it’s a sign of respect to look a person in the eye when
they're talking to you and asked him again if he understood and he said yes.
it was at this time that coach Patterson and began to, what | perceived as telling me how
to parent my child. | was then defensive and told him, | didn't ask him for his parenting
advice,
in the moment | felt | was being judged on my parenting and being told how to parent my

child. Certainly this situation could have been handled better by myself, and | intend to
apologize to coach Patterson upon our next meeting.

A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 3.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 10 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

35. On September 3, 2025 at 2:48 PM, Ms. Gauvin sent an email to the WYFC Board of
Directors. A true and accurate copy of said email is attached hereto as Exhibit 4.

36. In her email, Ms. Gauvin stated:

I would like to remind the Board that [Child 1] is a child with a diagnosed disability
and has been reported to ALL his coaches over the past 3+ years. Under the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act,
children with disabilities are entitled to equal participation in community programs,
including recreational and athletic activities. Excluding him from practice without
clear documentation, communication, or reasonable accommodation may
constitute discrimination based on disability.

Additionally, Massachusetts state law (M.G.L. c. IS51B and_ related
education/athletics statutes) prohibits discrimination against individuals with
disabilities in public accommodations and programs open to the community, such
as youth sports leagues.

I respectfully request the following:

1. A written explanation of the specific complaints and incidents that led to
this decision.

2. A clear outline of the league’s policies and procedures for handling
behavioral concerns.

3. An opportunity to meet and discuss constructive solutions, including
reasonable accommodations, so that [Child 1] can continue to participate
fully and safely in this program.

[Child 1] has been part of youth sports for several years without issue, and it is
heartbreaking to see him excluded without clarity or support. My hope is that
we can work collaboratively to ensure compliance with the law, and—more
importantly—that every child, regardless of ability, is given the chance to grow,
learn, and belong through this program.

Please respond in writing at your earliest convenience so we can resolve this
matter promptly and appropriately.

37. No written response was forthcoming.
38. Ms. Gauvin’s email communication to the WYFC Board of Directors was a protected

petitioning activity protected by operation of law.
Docket Number

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 11 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

Despite never having been informed by anyone at WYFC that Patterson alleged
Berkowitz was abusing his own stepson, Mr. Berkowitz was banned from practice and
subject to a bad faith and retaliatory filing of a complaint alleging abuse and neglect
pursuant to G.L. c. 119 §51A.

The act of filing a complaint pursuant to G.L. c. 119 §51A was retaliation and in
violation of both state and federal law and was done so in bad faith.

Later on September 3, 2025, while Ms. Gauvin, was walking to the field to watch her
children at practice, Leah Leahy, WYFC’s Fundraising and Marketing Director, along
with Mandracchia, and Bachant, confronted Gauvin.

Leahy told Plaintiff Gauvin that, since Child 1 was not permitted at practice, Ms.
Gauvin also could not remain at practice to watch her other children, and that she was
only permitted to, “drop her kids off.”

After Bachant made his discriminatory remarks about Child 1, Leahy added Child 1’s
presence was a “safety issue” because, if Child 1 were to run the ball, his teammates
might “choose not to block for him” due to the alleged statements he supposedly made.
Later that same evening, September 3, 2025, at approximately 5:50 p.m. at practice,
Mandracchia gave a different explanation, claiming Child 1 had allegedly threatened
to “gouge out eyeballs” of other players and added additional unspecified reasons why
Child 1 should not play at all.

Mandracchia gave no thought or consideration to the fact that even if Child 1 said he
was going to “gouge out eyeballs,” that such a statement was, more likely than not, a

manifestation of Child 1’s disability - Autism.
Docket Number

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 12 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

At no time did the Defendant consider any type of reasonable accommodation or any
consideration of Child 1’s disability or that any statement allegedly made by Child 1
was an actual and true threat.

The allegations made by the Defendant are a pretext to exclude Child 1 when there is
no evidence of Child 1 having made any statement that was a true threat to the health,
safety or welfare of any other player, coach or individual participant or spectator.

On September 4, 2025 at 7:57 AM, Mandracchia sent an email upholding Child 1’s
exclusion, but again provided no written complaints, documentation, or meaningful
opportunity for Plaintiff to review or respond to the allegations that lead to her son’s
exclusion. A true and accurate copy of said email is attached hereto as Exhibit SA.
Ms. Gauvin responded at 8:04 AM and again requested information and the specifics
about the alleged comments Mandracchia claimed Child | that lead to his exclusion by
the Defendant. A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 5B.
Ms. Gauvin asserted a formal complaint about two other players, Player 1 and Player
2 when it was clear to her that her child, Child 1, was being treated differently than
other non-disabled players. A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto
as Exhibit SC.

Mandracchia responded six minutes later at 8:10 AM and stated, “As I told you
yesterday, you will get a redacted copy of the final report...” and “When the final
decision is made, and if there’s punishment, you have the right to appeal in front of the
board.” A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 5D.
Mandracchia sent another email at 8:47 AM and stated, “This isn’t my first time doing

this and that’s not the first time I heard this type of response...I would like to remind
Docket Number

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 13 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

you that this is a private club. The board has the right to remove children and parents
if we feel it is in the best interests of the organization.” A true and accurate copy of
this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 5E.

Mandracchia’s commentary sct forth in his email fails to account for the fact that
WYFC is a place of public accommodation and is subject to both state and federal law.
In continuing in order of events, next, shortly after receiving Mandracchia’s missive,
on September 4, 2025, at approximately 9:25 a.m., Ms. Gauvin called the Town of
Sterling, as the owner and operator of GRAC, to advise that WYFC was attempting to
exclude and ban her minor children and their family from participating in youth football
that is associated with the Town of Sterling, by, among other things, the use of the
GRAC.

The Director of Recreation for the Town of Sterling, Tyler Ricl, confirmed to Ms.
Gauvin that she had every right to attend practices and games to observe their children,
despite WYFC’s repeated assertions that they could not.

The Plaintiffs complaint and report to the Town of Sterling was a protected petitioning
activity and the complaint and report of unlawful discrimination is protected conduct.
Ms. Gauvin responded to Mandracchia’s email on September 4, 2025 at 9:55 a.m. In
that email, Ms. Gauvin set forth her response to the email of September 4, but also the
telephone conversation of September 3, 2025 at 1:41 p.m. when the Plaintiffs were
informed that Child 1 was excluded from practice. A true and accurate copy of this
email is attached hereto as Exhibit SF.

Ms. Gauvin again requested the specifics of the complaints and reports of misconduct

by Child 1:

10
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 14 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM

Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

Accordingly, | request the following in writing:
4, Goples of all written reportsicomplaints thal.led io Mican’s exclusion.
2. A clear timeline of when these reports were made, by whom, and how they were decurnented.

3. The league's written policies and procedures for handling cornplaints, investigations, and disciplinary
decisions, including any appeal process.

4, Gonfirmation that my bullying complaint against Clayton and Jaxson will be investigated with equal
seriousness, including thei temporary suspension pending the oulcome.

5. Clarification an why Jeff was banned from attending practices without any direct communication te paranis
regarding the accusation agains! him.

6, Confirmation that | am permitted to attend practices with my other chidren while this matter is pending.

Please respond in writing no later than five (6) business days from today.and preserve ail related documents and
cermunications, including reports, emails, texts, internal messages, and coach notes concerning Micah, Jeff, and

my family.

A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 5F supra.

To date, none of this information has been produced because it either does not exist or
the Defendant has no intention of producing it.

On September 5, 2025, Mandracchia emailed the Plaintiffs and stated, “I received a
call today from the Sterling Recreation Department alerting me of your report. They
mentioned that we (Wachusett) were handling the situation correctly and did not
believe that you had a basis to claim discrimination.” A true and accurate copy of this
email exchange is attached hereto as Exhibit 6A et seq.

Mandracchia continued, “I spoke to the board about your action and we unanimously
agreed that your unprovoked attempt to hinder the organization’s ability to function in
Sterling will not be tolerated.” Id.

Incredibly, Mandracchia then doubled down and said, “We voted unanimously to
remove you both, and [Children 1, 2 and 4] from the program. As a sign of good faith,
we will offer a refund for the kids in exchange for a return of all equipment. Id.
What ensued next was an email exchange where Mandracchia explained that only Child

1, 2 and 4 were “banned” and Child 3, Ms. Gauvin’s biological child was not banned.

11
Docket Number

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 15 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

so long as he was accompanied by his father, Mike Taverna, and not Ms. Gauvin. To
date, none of this information has been produced because it either does not exist or the
Defendant has no intention of producing it. Copies of the email exchange are attached
hereto as Exhibits 6A-6M.

On September 5, 2025, Child 1’s biological father, Keith Lovejoy, learned that his sons
were, “being terminated from the Wachusett 10U team. As it was explained to me,
their mother Michelle and the board had some issues” and sent an email to
Mandracchia. He sent the email at 8:47 PM. A true and accurate copy of this email is
attached hereto as Exhibit 7A.

In response, Mandracchia responded, “I can explain tomorrow at 10 a.m. with a few
other board members. I'll send the Google meet now.” This was sent at 9:50 PM. Id.
Mandracchia scheduled an ad hoc, on-the-fly mecting with the Board for which he
provided no notice or an opportunity to be heard.

Lovejoy responded at 9:37AM the next morning, Saturday, September 6, 2025 and
stated, “I will not be able to make the meeting today. I was given less than a days
notice of this meeting. I cannot change my plans to accommodate this meeting.” A
true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 7B.

Mandracchia responded again, this time at 3:48 PM on Saturday, September 6: “It’s
okay, I know it was short notice for you and it probably feels a little out of the blue.
There is a long story but after we found out that we were reported to the state and to
the Town of Sterling by Michelle and Jeff, we unanimously decided that we do not

want to offer a solution. If we allow their kids to play, it would the the [sic] door open

12
Docket Number

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 16 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

69.

70.

71.

72.

73.

74,

for them to make baseless claims and to be disrespectful to our board and coaching
staff.” A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 7C.
Lovejoy responded, “I wish we could have come to an amicable resolution as my
children have put in a lot of work. And we are devastated upon finding out they
wouldn’t be allowed to remain with the team.” A true and accurate copy of this email
is attached hereto as Exhibit 7D.

The Defendant failed to advise or inform the Plaintiffs of any violation of the Code of
Conduct, rule infraction or other issue that would warrant Child 1’s exclusion and
dismissal from the program.

When the Plaintiff spoke up about Child 1’s treatment, exclusion, and status as a
disabled individual, WYFC and its Board, coaches and other individuals retaliated
against Plaintiff for her outspoken advocacy on behalf of her disabled child, Child 1.
Exclusion of Child 1 is discrimination and the Defendant’s exclusion of the Plaintiff's
other children from the program is a breach of contract, among other violations, are
acts of rooted in unlawful discrimination and retaliation in violation of both state and
federal law.

On September 12, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed the instant action with the Massachusetts
Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) and requested expedited removal to the
Superior Court pursuant to G.L. c. 151B §9 and 804 CMR (12)(a) and (b).

Shortly thereafter, the Investigating Commissioner allowed the request for expedited

removal to the Superior Court.

13
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 17 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

75. On September 15, 2025, John Mandracchia sent the following email to the
Plaintiffs:

The football equipment remains league property. If they are not returned
by this Friday, 9/19/26, the league will pursue further steps including
replacement cost recovery and, if necessary, a report with local authorities
for lost/stolen property or a civil claim to recover costs.

A true and accurate copy of this email is attached hereto as Exhibit 8.

76. On September 26, 2025, the Department of Children and Families (“DCF”) issued a
finding that did not substantiate the allegation which resulted in DCF closing “the
case,”

77. On Friday, September 26, 2025, the Defendant, through its president, Mandracchia and

Leahy, its Vice President, issued, in part, the following public statement:

To set the record straight, the decision to ask this family to leave was not
related to their child or children. It was due to the parents’ actions, which
violated our Code of Conduct. Each year, we require all parents and
guardians to sign this Code of Conduct before conditioning camp begins.
This policy is in place to ensure a smooth and positive season, with the
focus remaining on the development and well-being of our athletes.

When someone violates the Code of Conduct, it is at our discretion to take
appropriate action, including asking them to leave the program. This
standard is clearly outlined in the Code of Conduct, and we are committed
to upholding it.

We hope this statement clarifies the situation and allows us to move
forward with a successful and drama-free season, focused on what truly
matters: the growth, development, and safety of our athletes.

A true and accurate copy of said statement is attached hereto as Exhibit 9.

14
Docket Number

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 18 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

77.

78.

79,

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

I. CAUSES OF ACTION

Count I — Injunctive Relief
Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
forth herein.
Plaintiffs seek immediate and permanent injunctive relief to prevent the exclusion of
their minor children from participation in WYFC’s football program.
Plaintiffs and their children have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of
their claims for disability discrimination, retaliation, breach of contract, and related
statutory violations.
Absent injunctive relief, Plaintiffs’ minor children will suffer irreparable harm by being
excluded from the Fall 2025 football season, an opportunity for social, emotional
growth, educational, and athIctic development that cannot be restored once lost.
Monetary damages alone cannot adequately compensate for the loss of participation,
community standing, and the stigma associated with exclusion on the basis of disability
and retaliation.
The balance of harms favors Plaintiffs, as reinstating the children imposes minimal
burden on Defendant while preventing severe and irreparable harm to the children’s
rights and well-being.
Granting injunctive relief will serve the public interest by ensuring compliance with
anti-discrimination laws and equal access to community programs.
Plaintiffs therefore request that this Court enter immediate and permanent injunctive
relief reinstating Plaintiffs’ children into WYFC’s football program and enjoining

Defendant from further retaliatory or discriminatory conduct.

15
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 19 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM

Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court grant injunctive relief

by reinstating Plaintiffs’ children to the WYFC program, enjoin Defendant from further

discrimination or retaliation, award costs and attorneys’ fees, and grant such other equitable

relicf as the Court deems just.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

Count Il — Declaratory Judgment (G.L. c. 231A)
Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
forth herein.
An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendant regarding Plaintiffs’
rights under the ADA, Section 504, M.G.L. c. 151B, M.G.L. c. 272, M.G.L. c. 93, and
related laws.
Plaintiffs contend that Defendant’s exclusion of Child 1 from the program constitutes
unlawful discrimination and retaliation, while Defendant contends it acted within its
authority.
Pursuant to G.L. c. 231A, Plaintiffs are entitled to a judicial declaration of their rights
and Defendant’s duties.
A declaratory judgment will resolve the uncertainty and provide guidance to the parties

regarding their rights and obligations going forward.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court declare that

Defendant’s exclusion of Plaintiffs’ children was unlawful, that Defendant’s conduct

violated federal and state anti-discrimination laws, and that Plaintiffs are entitled to equal

access and participation, together with costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

16
Docket Number

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 20 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

90.

91.

92.

93.

94

95.

96.

97.

Count IT] — Disability Discrimination (ADA, Section 504, M.G.L. c. 151B)
Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
forth herein.

Plaintiff's minor child, Child 1 is a qualified individual with a disability within the
meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12102, and Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 705(20).

Child | has been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder and, despite this diagnosis,
successfully participated in WYFC programs for four consecutive years without
incident.

Defendant is an entity that is a place of public accommodation subject to the

requirements of the ADA, Section 504, and M.G.L. c. 151B.

. Defendant discriminated against Child 1 on the basis of disability by excluding him

from football practices and games, despite medical clearance and satisfactory
participation.

Defendant further discriminated by refusing to provide reasonable accommodations,
failing to engage in any interactive process, and denying due process protections
afforded under law.

The Plaintiffs asserted lawfully protected complaints of discrimination to both WYFC
and the Town of Sterling regarding these actions and unlawful conduct.

Defendant’s actions to exclude Child | and the Plaintiffs’ other minor children were
intentional, malicious, and in reckless disregard of Plaintiffs’ federally and state

secured rights to be free from unlawful discrimination and retaliation.

17
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 21 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

98. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiffs and their children suffered loss of
participation, emotional distress, humiliation, and other compensable damages for

which they reserve the right to bring suit and file in the Superior Court.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in
their favor, declare Defendant’s conduct unlawful, award compensatory damages, punitive
damages where available, attorneys’ fees, costs, and such other relief as the Court deems

just and proper.

Count IV — Retaliation (ADA, Section 504, M.G.L. c. 151B §4)

99. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set
forth herein.

100. Plaintiffs engaged in protected activity by reporting discrimination to WYFC’s
Board of Directors, by petitioning the Town of Sterling, and by asserting rights under
the ADA, Section 504 and 151B.

101. Defendant, through its officers and agents, retaliated against Plaintiffs and their
children for engaging in such protected activity.

102. Retaliatory acts included:

(a) admitting to Keith Lovejoy, in writing, that the Plaintiffs were being banned for
reporting the Defendant to the state and town;

(b) contacting or causing to be contacted the Department of Children and Families
alleging a bad faith filing of an allegation of abuse and neglect that was summarily
unsupported and unsubstantiated;

(c)} banning Plaintiffs’ minor children from practices, and expelling Children 1, 2 and
4 from the program; and

18
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 22 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

(d) Defendant’s subjecting the Plaintiffs to intentional threats, intimidation and
coercion by demanding they return the children’s football gear and equipment to
the Sterling Police Department without any reasonable or justifiable basis for doing
so.

103. Defendant’s retaliatory actions would dissuade and chill a reasonable parent or
participant from engaging in protected activity to report unlawful discrimination on the
basis of disability.

104. The Defendant’s conduct constitutes unlawful retaliation in violation of state and
federal law.
105. Asaresult, Plaintiffs and their children have suffered damages, including emotional

distress, reputational harm, and loss of participation in community programs.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in
their favor, award compensatory damages, punitive damages where available, attorneys’

fees, costs, and such further relief as the Court deems just.

Count V — Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law
(M.G.L. c. 272, §§ 92A, 98, 98A)

106. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully
set forth herein.

107. WYFC operates as a youth sports organization open to all children in the Wachusett
region and solicits the participation of the general public.

108. WYFC is a community-based organization and program.

19
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 23 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

109. WYFC conducts its activities at the Griffin Road Athletic Complex, property of the
Town of Sterling, and is therefore a place of public accommodation under M.G.L. c.
272, § 92A.

110. By excluding Child 1 on the basis of his disability, disparaging him, and banning
his family, Defendant denied Plaintiffs the “full and equal accommodations,
advantages, facilities, and privileges” guaranteed by law.

111.  Defendant’s conduct constitutes unlawful discrimination and retaliation under
M.GLL. c. 272, §§ 98 and 98A.

112. Asa direct and proximate result, Plaintiffs and their children suffered injuries and
damages resulting from unlawful acts including humiliation, reputational damage, and

denial of equal access to a public accommodation.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in
their favor, declare Defendant’s conduct unlawful, award compensatory damages, treble

damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Count VI — Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (M.G.L. ec. 12, §§ LLH-D

113. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully
set forth herein.

114. Plaintiffs have secured rights under the ADA, Section 504, and Massachusetts law
to equal participation in public accommodations free from discrimination.

115. Defendant, through threats, intimidation, and coercion—including overt threats,
intimidation and coercion expressed, inter alia, by Mandracchia’s emails — interfered
with the exercise of those rights afforded by state and federal law.

116. Defendant’s unlawful acts and conduct include, but are not limited to:

20
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 24 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

(a) threats of exclusion;

(b) threats of state agency reports and actual reports alleging unsupported and
fabricated claims of abuse and neglect that were filed in bad faith;

(c) intimidation by intimating that the “board” answers to no one and can deprive the
Plaintiffs and their minor children of equal access and equal participation in a place
of public accommodation free from discrimination without any meaningful
participation in an interactive process, due process or any process.

(d) coercive demands that the Plaintiffs return equipment to the police department
when no other family is forced or constrained to do something he would not
otherwise have done;

(e) coercive demands threatening that if the Plaintiffs did not return the children’s
football equipment by an arbitrary date that the Defendant would report the
Plaintiffs to the “authorities,” report the equipment as “stolen” and initiate a civil
action for damages and “recovery.”

(f) coercive bans from participation based on no evidence of unlawful conduct or a
violation of the so-called “Code of Conduct.”

117. By its acts and conduct, the Defendant interfered with the Plaintiffs exercise of those
rights to be free from discrimination as provided for by state and federal law.
118. Defendant’s actions were deliberate, malicious, and designed to chill Plaintiff's
advocacy on behalf of her disabled child, other children and household members.
119. Defendant’s conduct constitutes violations of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act,

G.L. c. 12, §§ 11H-I.

21
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 25 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

120. Asaresult, Plaintiff and her children have suffered injuries including loss of rights,

emotional distress, and other damages.

WHEREFFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in
their favor, issue appropriate equitable relief, award compensatory and punitive damages,

attorneys’ fees, costs, and such further relicf as the Court deems just.

Count VII — Massachusetts Equal Rights Act (M.G.L. c. 93, § 102) (Retaliation)

121. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully
set forth herein.

122. The Massachusetts Equal Rights Act guarantees that, “All persons within the
Commonwealth, regardless of sex, race, color, creed or national origin, shall have,
except as is otherwise provided or permitted by law, the same rights enjoyed by white
male citizens, to make and enforce contracts, to inherit, purchase, to lease, sell, hold
and convey real and personal property, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full
and cqual benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property,
and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions
of every kind, and to no other.”

123. Asa direct and proximate result of the Defendant’s actions, the Plaintiff, Michelle
Gauvin, was denied the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings, by being
subject to discrimination on the basis of her sex, by being excluded from all football
activities of three out of four of her minor children.

124. The Defendant did not exclude Ms. Gauvin’s other child (Child 3) provided that he
was accompanied by his biological father.

125. The Defendant treated Ms. Gauvin disparately based on her sex.

22
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 26 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

126. This exclusion also constitutes discrimination on the basis of sex, in violation of
state and federal law and is also retaliation for Ms. Gauvin’s protected activity and
conduct of reporting and asserting claims of unlawful discrimination on behalf of her
minor son, Child 1.

127. By paying registration fees and fulfilling conditions of participation, Plaintiff and
her children entered into a contractual relationship with Defendant.

128. Defendant retaliated against Ms. Gauvin by banning her children from participation
and making exception when one child was accompanied by his father.

129. Any other reason asserted by the Defendant for Ms. Gauvin’s exclusion is nothing
more than a pretext and an unveiled attempt to deflect from a light being shown on its
own unlawful conduct.

130. Asaresult, Plaintiff and her children have sustained damages, including emotional

harm, reputational injury, and denial of rights guaranteed under Massachusetts law.

WHERFFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in
their favor, declare Defendant’s conduct unlawful, award compensatory damages, punitive

damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, and such further relief as the Court deems just.

Count VIII — Breach of Contract and/or Promissory Estoppel
131. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully
set forth herein.
132. Plaintiffs entered into a contract with Defendant by paying registration fees and
meeting all conditions precedent for participation.
133. Defendant accepted the benefits of this contract by permitting Plaintiffs’ children

to practice and participate until September 2025.

23
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 27 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

134. Defendant breached the agreement by arbitrarily expelling Plaintiffs’ children and
the entire family, without just cause or adherence to any stated policies.

135. In the alternative, Plaintiffs reasonably relied to their detriment on Defendant’s
promises and assurances of participation to their detriment.

136. Defendant’s breach and repudiation caused Plaintiffs to suffer damages, including

financial loss, emotional distress, and denial of participation in youth sports.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in
their favor, award compensatory damages, consequential damages, attorneys’ fees where

permitted, costs, and such further relief as the Court deems just.

Count IX — Defamation
137. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
herein.
138. The Defendant stated the Plaintiffs violated the Code of Conduct and published that
statement to third partics.
139. These statements were false when made.
140. The Defendant knew or should have known that publicly making such statements about
the Plaintiffs may prejudice the plaintiffs’ profession or business.
141. These statements constitute defamation per se.
142. These statements were published to third parties, including parents, coaches, and
community members, and were understood as statements of fact.
143. Defendant’s statements were false, malicious, and not privileged.
144. As a direct result, the Plaintiffs suffered reputational harm, stigmatization, and a hostile

environment that excluded the Plaintiffs and their family from equal access and equal

24
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 28 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

opportunity of participation free from discrimination, discriminatory animus, retaliation and
the related hostile environment.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in their favor,

award compensatory damages, punitive damages where available, attorneys’ feces, costs, and

such further relief as the Court deems just.

PRAYERS FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court grant the following relief:
A) Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs on all counts;
B) Declare that Defendant’s conduct violated G.L. c. 272, G.L. c. 93, and G.L. c. 12;
C) Issue injunctive relief requiring Defendant to reinstate Children 1, 2 and 4 to the
program;

D) Order the Respondent to take immediate remedial action, including but not limited

to:

i) Retaining and hiring expert consultants to provide training and education to
the Defendant its volunteers, coaches, staff and players regarding
discrimination on the basis of membership in a protected class, to wit,
(disability); and

i) Draft, prepare and immediately adopt anti-discrimination policies and

disseminate said policies to all board members, coaches, volunteers and
players and include such policies with materials upon registration for

WYFC.

25
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 29 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E) Award compensatory damages for emotional distress, humiliation, and loss of
participation;
F) Award statutory damages and attorneys’ fees as permitted by law; and

G) Grant such further relicf as this Court deems just and proper.

JURY DEMAND

The Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

Respectfully submitted,

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, Individually and as Parents and
Next Friend of Their Minor Children,

By their attorney,

Peter S. Faulks

Peter S. Farrell (BBO #656512)
Farrell Law Group PLLC

Date: October 2, 2025 46 Railroad Avenue, Suite 204
Duxbury, MA 02332
Tel: (781) 236-3620
pfarrell(@farrelllg.com

26
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 30 of 96

Michelle Gauvin
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG.._ Document 2-3... Filed 10/14/25 Page 31 of 96

A7ethrey Berkowitz

par: (0/2/25

Fee
~
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 32 of 96
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3  Filed.10/14/25 Page 330

Pe ec mM nm oo

= Oo fe rn a

moe Ht Ee OO

PARTICIPANT NAME
#4 5th grade 10
JERSEY # GRADE AGE (134)
michelle Gauvin
PARTICIPANT PARENT/GUARDIAN NAME
5088267899
HOME PHONE WORK PHONE CELL PHONE
reer,
|, Hereby, With My Signature, Oo Certify That The Information Bolow Has Hoon Collected And Vorified By Tho Means, As A Minimum,
Ag Instructed in The AYF National Rulebook And/Or Operations Manuel, Currant Version,
———— OFFICIAL PLAYER CERTIFICATION Freee nae
oronce Vortication Signatura LEAGUE USE ONLY seociation Varification Signature
BATE OF BRTH Age As of GRADE (AGE | | PARTICIPANT MEDICAL WAIVER BUBRGENCY | | SCHOLASTICS
Pt Tat CERREICATION | | CONTRACT LEARANCE RELEASE EDC,
CONSENT
10
Monin / Day { faar
GAME DATE | PLAYER CHECK | = CODE GAME DATE [PLAYER CHECKT = CODE
JAMBOREE JAMBOREE
Week { Week 11
Week? Week 12
Week 3 Week 13
Weak 4 Week 14
Week § Week 15
Wook 6 Week 16
Weak 7 Week 17
Week 8 | Week 1
Week 9 Week 19
Weak 10 Week 20

INSTRUCTIONS: PLAYER CHECK Will Enter Data, Verity The identity, Of Each Pariicinartt, Initial Each Participant Card,
CODE: OK = Everything Verified, | = Sicwinjured, A= Absent / Dropped
ALL MUST BE CHECKED IN/ VERIFIED PLAYING OR NOT/ ENTER DETAIL UNDER “CODE”

“+4 2 © "o

= OG ww &}& fri os
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 34 of 96

Medical Inurance Name of Insurance Carriar Policy #
Mass health Na
Football or Cheer Registration Fee Checkt Cash
$

PERMISSION 10 PARTICIPATE

| acknowledge that | am fully aware of the potential dangers of participation in any sport, and | fully understand that
participation in football, cheerleading, dance and/or step may result in SERIOUS INJURIES, PARALYSIS, PERMANENT
DISABILITY AND/OR DEATH, Furthermore, | fully acknowledge and understand that protective equipment does not
prevent all parlicipant injuries. |, the parentiguardian of the above-named participant, do hereby giva my approval for my
child/ward fo participate, and furlher assert that | have verified with my child/wards’ physician, and in my opinion, my chitd/
ward is physically fit and can participate without limitation in any and all Local, Regional, National, League/Conference,
Association and tean/squad activities, including transportation to and from the activities by a licensed driver.

SCHOLASTIC FITNESS Initials
| am of the opinion that my son/daughter/ward is scholastically fit and would benefit by participation in this program.
| agree to gubmit a copy of my son/daughter/ward’s last completed grade, end of year/last complete report card or a
writen statement of scholastic fitness from the school administration,

HELMET WAIVER {for football partiejpants} intial:
We acknowledge, AND WE understand the risks involved in my CHILDAWARD, my playing FOOTBALL, which is a
collision sport; the NOCSAE commitiee has adopted the folowing warming to be read by, and signed by, both the parent/
guardian and participant. “DO NOT USE THIS HELMET TO BUTT, RAM OR SPEAR AN OPPOSING PLAYER, THIS 1S
IN VIOLATION OF FOOTBALL RULES AND CAN RESULT IN SEVERE HEAD, BRAIN OR NECK INJURY, PARALYSIS
OR DEATH AND POSSIBLE INJURY TO YOUR OPPONENT, THERE 1S A RISK THAT THESE INJURIES MAY ALSO
OCCUR AS A RESULT OF AN ACCIDENTAL CONTACT WITHOUT INTENT TO BUTT, RAM OR SPEAR, NO HELMET
CAN PREVENT ALL SUCH INJURIES.*

EQUIPMENT UNIFORM RESPONSIBILITY Parent/Guardian Initial: Player Initia:
| assume full responsibilty for any and all equioment/uniforms loaned to my child/ward and | agree to promptly return,
upon request, the uniform and other equipment in as good condition as when received excent for normal wear and tear.
if {fail to adhere to this policy, | wil be responsible for and promptly pay the replacement cost of such equipment,

CODE OF CONDUCT initial:
The Ideology OF Youth Sports Including This Program Is To Promote Good Understanding And Fundamental Knowledge Of The Sport
Itls Also Critical That Good Sportsmanship Including The Ablity To Always Conduct Oneself In An Appropriate Manner Of Positive
Accord Both On And Off The Field. It ls Understood That Any Incident Considered Detrimental To The Pursuit Of This Ideology Wil Not
Be Tolarated. It Wilt Be Addrassed In Accordance With The Statutes Of The Association, Conference, Currant National Aftiation, State
and Local Laws, And May Resuit In Dismissal From The Program And The Inability To Participate In Any Future Related Activities Of
The Association. This Code Of Conduct Applies To All Involved With The Program Including But Not Limited To, The Football Players,

Cheerleaders, Spirt Participants, Parents And Guardians. titiat
michelle Gauvin
PRINT Parent/Guardian Name Parent/Guardian Signature Date Signed

NOTE: This form as with any and all forms used by your Assoriatlor should be reviewed by your local counsel for
compliance with any state or local statuses, This f file for a | of

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG___Document 2-3 __ Filed 10/14/25 Page 35 of 96
PARENT OR GUARDIAN INFORMATION

Parent/Guardian 1 Name: michelle Gauvin

Address:
Mome Phone:

Employer.

Parent/Guardian 2 Name:

Address: City: State: Zip:
Home Phone: Daytine Phone: Email:

Employer.

ParentiGuardian 3 Name:
Address. City: State: dip.
Home Phone: Daytime Phone: Email:

Employer:

Carrier, Mass health Group:
Policy #: Na
Policy Holder Name:
Family Physician's Name!

EMERGENCY MEDICAL INSURANCE

Preferred Hospital(s): Boston childrens
|EMERCENCY CONTACT: —_ Michelle Gauvin Phone: 5088267899 Relationshis: Mother

Please list any medical conditions (allergies, asthma, atc.) And medications being taken by the particinant named above,
Please list any other information you may deem relavant, and helpful to emergency medical personnel: (please note if no
information is given and the words “none” or "ra" is not filled in then, “none” wil be assumed,

Allergies: chickpeas
Medical Conditions: autism
Other: i
*| as evidenced below hereby grant permission for my childAward fo participate in any and ai

Wachusett Youth Football & Cheer (Association name} and, American Youth Football, Inc. program(s) event(s),
including but not limited to, athletic, social and/or fundraising activities. { further consent to the administration of any and all medical
frealment necessary to stabilize and or treat any medical condition or medical emergency to which my chid‘ward is afflicted. | understand
that this authorization is given prior to the need for madical care, but given in advance fo avoid any unnecessary delay in emergency
treatment which the attendant and/or medical professional may deem advisable in the exercise of thelr best judgment.

michelle Gauvin
"Print Parent/Legal Guardian Name “Signature ParentLegal Guardian ‘Date

Tha original Emergancy Medical Treatment, Consent and Information form should travel with the coach and a copy should be
kept at the administrative office of the sports organization. Due to privacy concerns, completed forms should be stored ina
secure location with access rasirictad fo those on a need to know basis for the purpose of medical cara,

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 36 of 96
Case 4:25-cv 40162 MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 37 of 96

Tua FOE Vg

Fw: Thursdays incident

jeff berkowitz <jeff_berkowitz@yahoo.com> Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 10:27 PM
To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@gmail. com>

g

Ser tor Yahoo High for Phone

He

EXHIBIT

Z

On Sun, Jul 27, 2025 at 9:59 PM jeff berkowitz <e!)_ berkowilz @yahoo.com> wrote!
Hi John,
Thank you for getting back to me. Yes, most of the coaching staff plus a host of parents were all
present.
Thank you

spe

Sent from Yantoo Mall tor Phoa

ce

ha <president@wachuseltyic org>

Hi Jef,

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We will investigate this incident and follow up
with you. Quick question, were others around besides you and Ben that would have
observed this incident? .

httos:timall. qoogle.com/mailfu/2/%k=454abd 8O0kviewspt&searchea...mplemsg-f 1830127715487 1924 dasimplemsy-ait-3780460892597510120 Page i of 3
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 38 of 96

Sant from Yahoo Mat jor Phase

Michelle Gauvin <gawvinm86@gmail.com> Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 10:31 PM
To: jeff berkowitz <jeff_berkowitz@yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: Incident on July 24 - Follow-Up
Hi John,
Thank you for taking the time to investigate the matter and for following up with me.

While | appreciate that you addressed the situation with Ben, | want to reiterate that my concer was not solely about
whether his actions met the formal definition of bullying—-but rather the disconnect between his behavior and the
standard he set for others at the start of the season. On the first day of practice, Ben clearly stated that both
coaches and parents would be held to the same level of respect and professionalism. Unfortunately, his decision to
raise his voice at me across the field did not reflect those values,

| want to emphasize that we absolutely respect and appreciate the time and commitment that volunteers put into

hites:/fmall.google.com/enalllu/2/7ke 456a84'800viewsptésearchs... mplemsg-{:18391277184871024148 simplamsg-a:r-3780480892807510120 Page Zaf 3
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 | Filed 10/14/25 Page 39 of 96
That experience has already left me with some questions, and this recent incident only added to my concerns.

| truly hope this serves as a reminder for everyone involved to uphold the same respect and accountabiity that is
asked of families and players. If anything further arises, | will not hesitate to reach out to you or to Tom Galvin, as

suggested.
Thank you again for your time and consideration.

Best regards,
[Your Full Name}
[Your Contact Info, if desired!

hitos:|/mall google com/maifu/2/7k=456a84 1800aview=pl&eaarchs..mplomsg-148301277154871924 1d simplemeg-ar-37804608828975 10120 Page Sof 3
on £ TTS 17

Case 4:25-cv A0162-MRG Document 2-3. Filed 10/14/25 Page 40 of 96

(no subject)

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@ginall.com> Sun, Jul 27, 2025 at 2:38 PM
To: jeff_berkowitz@yahoo.com

mresicentwachisally'¢ ore

Dear JohnMandracchia,

I'm writing to express my concam about an incident that occurred with Ben, the football director, on July 24, 2026. At
approximately 6:40 PM, | was on the field throwing a football with my son and my step-sons. During that time, | had to
discipline my son in a manner that was appropriate to the situation.

To my surprise, Ben yelled across the field, stating that | could not ‘yell’ at my son. | want to be clear that | was not
acting inappropriately and was well within my rights as a parent. Ben then proceeded to say that | ‘wasn't supposed to
be on the field,” even though this occurred before practice began.

His public remarks were unwarranted and, frankly, felt more like intimidation or bullying than constructive
communication,

At the first practice, Ben clearly stated that coaches would be held to the same standards as parents, with a zero-
tolerance policy for inappropriate behavior. Unfortunately, his actions during this incident did not reflect those
standards. As you know, both WYFC and CMYF maintain zero-tolerance policies regarding bullying, and | believe
this situation falls within that category.

| hope this concam will be taken seriously and addressed appropriately, | am more than willing to speak further if
needed.

Thank you for your time and attention.
Best regards,

Jeffery Berkowitz
(508)245-0163

httos:{/mali google com/mellfu/2/7k=4b6ad1800dviaw=ptasearchea...thread-ar-BB3571971328502/4648simpi=msg-a:r7928109003134526282 Page taf
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 41 of 96
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG_ Document 2-3___- Filed 10/14/25 Page 42 of 96
Cc Peter Farrell <plarreli@tarreliavin.com>

Good morning,

Michelle just reminded me that | never sent you my email to the board regarding my situation with the
coach and Michelle's son. | am also going to forward you the complaint email | sent to John at the
beginning of the season regarding a situation between myself and Ben the league director.

Begin forwarded message:

On Wednesday, September 3, 2025, 2:12 PM, jeff berkowitz <jeff_berkowitz@yahoo.com> wrote:

John,
in regards to our conversation this afternoon involving myself and Coach Patterson.

Towards the end of practice last night | was having a discussion with my step son, He had
kicked over a a couple water bottles and his mother had asked him to pick it up and he
snapped back at her and said “NO! i'm not picking it up". | turned back to IIINIBand
told him “enough with the back talk" (as this has been an on going behavioral issue). |
then explained that “the back talk is not acceptable from the older 3 (his brothers and my
son} and it's not acceptable from him either. | asked if he understood and while looking at
the ground and jumping around, | grabbed his arm to hold him still and asked him to
make eye contact with me because it’s a sign of respect to look @ person in the eye when
they're talking to you and asked him again if he understood and he said yes.

it was at this time that coach Patterson and began to, what | perceived as telling me how
to parent my child, | was then defensive and told him, | dich’t ask him for his parenting
advice,

in the moment | felt | was being judged on my parenting and being told how to parent my
child. Certainly this situation could have been handled better by myself, and | intend to
apologize to coach Patterson upon our next meeting,

Thank you,
Case 4:25-cv 40162 MRG Document 2-3. Filed 10/14/25 Page 43 of 96
email as spam.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 44 of 96
Case 4:25-Cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 45 of 96

Concern Regarding Exclusion of My Son fl irom Youth Football Practice

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinenBi@amal. com> Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 248 PM
To: John Mandracchia <president@wachusettytc.crg>

Dear Wachusett Youth Football & Cheer Board,

| am writing to formally address a concerning situation that was brought to my atfention, On September 3.2028, |
received 4 phone call from President John Mandracchia, informing me that my son (MMM who has autism, isnot
allowed to attend foottll practice tonight, and possibly no! tomorrow, due to ‘multiple complaints” that were reported
last week, and that were nol specified to me.

ASPIRE parent, have not been provided with any details regarding what these complaints are, what specifi
behaviors are in quastion, or how these concerns were documented. Without transparency itis impossible for me to
faspond on his behalf or help him adjust f needed.

{ would like to remind the Board thallllllllis a child with a diagnosed disability, and has been reported to ALi his
couches over the past 3+ years. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section $04 ofthe _
Rehabilitation Act, children with disablities are entitled to equal participation in community programs, Including
recreational and athletic activities, Excluding him from practice without crear documentation, communication, or
reasonable accommodation may consiitite discrimination based on disability.

Additionally, Massachusetts slate law (M.G.L. c. (518 and related educalion/athiatics statutes} prohibits discrmination
agains! individuals with disabilities in public accommodations and programs open te the community, such as youth
sports leagues.

i respectfully request the following:
{. Awritten explanation of the specific complaints and incidents that led to this decision.
2. Aclear outline of the league's policies and procedures for handling behaviorai concems.

3, An opportunity to meet and discuss constructive solutions, including reasonable accommodations, so that
a: continue fo participate fuly ard safely in this program,

BRB has been part of youth sports for several years without issue, and itis heartbreaking to see him excluded
without clarity or support, My hope is that we can work collaboratively to ensure complance with the law, and—tore
importantly-that every chi, regardiess of ability, is given the chance to grow, learn, and belong through this

program,
Please respond in wriling at your earliest convenience go we can resolve this matter promplly and appropriately.
Sincerely,

Michelle Gauvin

(308}826-7899

Ning: teal gooale. compnaifuld ed beBA BOOK went a gnarehe simniemag ABA TSA AGNI GIRGS ae baimplemag (EA OF 260ARNI8I573 Baga Tal
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 46 of 96
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 47 of 96

A

Hi Michelle

Thanks for the feedback, Apologies is | wasn't clear yesterday when we spoke, hopefully th
discussion in the afternoon cleared t vie up for you. To be rehash, your child has been
asked to stay home until we sort out the reports.

The move fo ask players to not attend practice is the right of the board if we feel there is a
safety concern. Since it was reported that your child stated that he’ wanted gouge ow!
— have exercise the right of the precautionary,

| wil be following up before the game this weekend. Please plan on havinglfllstay home
again today until we complete the investigation

Thank you for your understanding

“John

Michelle Gauvin <qauvinmaé@gmail com> Thy, Sep 4, 2028 af 8:04 AM
To; John Mandracchia <president@wachuseltyfc.org>

Where are my copies of the reports? | also want the copy of the alleged comments you are aiming llsaid. i also
want a meeting with Jared and his wife since you claimed they bath reported | also want documentation from
the coaches that alleges doesn't tr, “doesn’t seem fo want to be here" and how “he's a safaty risk on the felt
thal Ben reported. | would axpect you tor have all reports as you are denying him to practice again,
Thank you

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 4, 2025, af 757, AM, John Mandracchia <ive

John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyfc.org> Thu, Sep 4. 2025 at 8:10 AM
To; Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm36 @gmail com —_—

As | mentioned to you yesterday, you wil get a redacted copt of the final report,
| never stated who reported this beyond the head coach. Please slop sanding messages sialing | did.

When the final decision is made, and if there's punishment, you have the right fe appeal in front of the board. |

Hitea imal qooila comlitalh. 2/0: ABSuB A A Ole lavicpthsearche .simpinmag htRd ge REISS? a8 bainiginmen eh RADIA IaDeROGEOHT = Page 2 of 2
Case 4:25-Cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 48 of 96

Re: Concern Regarding Exclusion of My Son JM from Youth Football Practic

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinmBé@gmall com> Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 8:09 AM
To: John Mandracchia <president@wachuseltyc.org>

| would also lke to formally complain orreprt bullying trom ilar IMME They both on mutiple oovasions
have targeted Mlllphysically and verbaly, by throwing hirn on the ground, telling his he's sucks ect ! would expect
to not see both of them at practice til you have investigated this as well as this is the standard you have set for my

Kids. | will algo be af praction with my boys rit lille sit cut and there is no reason why | should not be
allowed fo be there a5 | have kids practicing!

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 4. 2025, at &05.AM, Michelle Gauvin <®

ate my copies of the reports? | also want the copy of the alleged comments you are claimin
id. | algo want a meeting with Jared and his wile since you claimed they both reported |
ais want decumentation from the coaches that al doese't iy, “doesn't seem fo want to be
here” and how “he's a safely risk on the field" that Ben reported. | would expect you now have all reports
as you are dering him to practiog again,
Thank you
Sent from my iPhone

On Seo 4, 2025, at 7:57 AM, John Mandracchia «

Hi Michelle

Thanks for the feedback. Apologies is | wasn't clear yesterday when we
spoke, hopefully the discussion in the aftemoon cleared things up for
you. Te be rehash, your child has beer asked to stay home unti we
sort out the reports.

The move to ask players to not attend practice is the rignt of fhe board
if we feel there is a safety concern, Since it was reported that your chitd
stated that he” wanted gouge out eyeballs! have exercise the right of
the precautionary.

| wil be following up before the game this weekend. Please plan on
having MMMM stay home again today until we complete the
investigation

Thank you for your understanding

Afiea yall googie comin ial D/TesdbR ald WONGinwaglRswatete dephomeg-f TBATITPIS/7IROIG Ghsimntamege pr MOTORAL INTIS. «Page 195
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 49 of 96
On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 2:48 PM Michelle Gavin <2ouneieSCigiia’. come wrote:

Dear Wachusett Youth Football & Cheer Board,

i amt wilting to formally address a conceming situation that was brought fo my attention.
On September 3,2025, | received a phone call from President John Mandracchia,
informing me that my son, MBM who has autism, isnot allowed to atend football
practice tonight, and possibly not tomorrow, due to “multiple complaints” thal were
reported last week, and that were not specified to me,

AGMBBIBIs parent, | have not been provided wih any details regarding what these
compiaints are, what specific behaviors are in question, or how these concerns were
documented. Without transparency, it is impossible for me to respond on his behatf or
help him adust ff needed.

{would like to remind the Board thatllllis 4 child with a diagnosed disability, and
has been reported to ALL his couches over the past 3+ years. Under the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 604 of the Rehabilitation Act, chidren with
disabilities are entited to equal participation in community programs, including
recreational and athletic activities. Excluding him from practice withoul clear
documentation, communication, or reasonable accommodation may constitute
discrimination based on disability,

Additionally, Massachusetts state law (MG.L.¢. 151B and related educatiov/athletics
statutes) prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilties in public
accommodations and programs open fo the community, such as youth sports leagues.
| respactiully request the following:

1, Awritten explanation of the specific complaints and incidents that led to this
decision.

2. Aclear outline of the league's policies and procedures for handling behavioral
concerns,

3. An opportunity to meet and discuss constructive solutions, inclading reasonable
accommodations, so that Micah can cantinue to participate fully and safely in this

program.

| ois been part of youth sports for several years without ssue, and tis
heartbreaking fo see him excluded without clarity of support. My Nope is thal we can
work collaboratively to ensure compliance with the law, and-more importartly—that
avery child, regardless of ablity, is given the chance fo grow, lear, and belong through
this program.

Please respond in writing at your earliest convettienoe so we can resolve this matier
promptly and aporopriately.

Sincerely,
Michelle Gauvin
(508)826-7899

Astasynali googie cominalfel2) MaerdbaGe BOM encotbuenrcie. implemag-fIBALRIEGRT B00 2b IGksnalcmisy aTSTRMBTIITN UE Faye Lat
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 50 of 96
To: gauvinma6@gmail.com
Go: Ben Bachant <footbaildin@wachusellyfc.org>, Leah Leahy <marketing@wachusetivic.org>

Hi,

This isn't my first time doing this and that's not the first time | heard this type of response. | ask that you take this
seriously. | would like to remind you that this is a private club. The board has the right to remove chidren anc parent
if we feel it ts in the best interest of the organization.

if you have an issue with the players mistreating your child, please put ft in your official rebuttal to the investigation
involving your child

The board will follow up shortly

Michelle Gauvin <qauvinmé6@gmall com> Thu, Sep 4. 2025 at 958 AM
To: John Mandracchia <presdent@wachusettyic.org>

Subject: Formal Rebuttal and Complaint Regarding Ills Exclusion
Dear John and Wachusett Youth Football & Cheer Board,

| am witng in response to your message dated September 4, 2028 regarding the exchison of my son lll from |
football practice, as well as your phone call on September 3 at 1:44 p.m,

First, must formally object toll being barred from participation without specific avidence or documentation of
the alleged incident,

Your explanations have been Inconsistent,

+ in your September 3 phone cal, you statedllMll could not attend practice due to “multiple complaints from
last week,” but you were unable to provide specifics. This left a ten-year-old child told he could not practice
with no explanation—and gave his parant no opportunity to respond or help him adjust

+ Later, on September 3 at approximately 5:50 p.m. al practiog, you gave a different reason, slating i was
because aleged!y said he ‘wanted to gouge out eyeballs" and then added further bases for why I
should not only miss practice but potentially not play at al,

This shifing rationale raises serious concerns aboct the falmess, accuracy, and legitimacy of the decision. Without
clear, consistent documentation, there is no valid basis for excluding cor any opportunity for me to address or

support him.

Additionally, comments made by Football Director Ben Bachant on September 3 are deeply troubling and
descrimatory. He slated thal

+ ‘Doesn't seem like he wants to be here,”

« “Doesn't put in much effort,”

» “Is unsafe onthe line.”

+ “He freezes on the line and is a danger to himee'f’

+ ‘ishe mentally mature enough to be on a team?” and

tiga: male quogle con mally Taaaegabe B0GEviewsptbsearshia implameg(ARAQ03 038773002 narotonag wr TUENGIUT RE Page $0? 8
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 _ Page 51 of
coach, Jarred Louchart telling bothlJand me on September 2 how proud Ne was mM and now nat 06

hag been working this year. The stark contrast hetween the head coach's pasitive feedback and the Board's sudden
negative characterization highlights clear inconsistency and unfaimess.

itig also unacceptable that my family is being punished alongsidellMll. Not on'y has DMM been excluded.
without a fair process, but! have also been told | am not alowed at the fleld with my three other sons who play. On
the morning of September 4 at 9:25 aum.,| spoke directly wih Tyler Riel from the Town of Sterling, who confirmed
that | have every right to attend practices and games to observe my other chlidren, Denying me this rig't

is retaliatory, discriminatory, and without lawful basis.

Further, the broader context strongly suggests blas and targeting:

« Coach Patterson ((MBIIMI's father} yelled at my boyfriend, Jeff, on the sidelines at the end of practice
on September 2, accusing him of ‘abusing’ my younger son, IIMIMME when Jeff was discipining him.
Neither of MMIII parent's were informed of this accusation, yet Jeff was told he could no longer attend
practices. {the league truly believed there was a safety cancer, It would have been Incumbent on you fo
promptly inform MMMMIMI's parents.

+ Later thal night, on Septembar 2 at 14:23 p.m.,! posted on SportsEngine asking parents to encourage
positive team behavior. Jerica (team mom} publicly commented then took down “even the parents on the
sideline.” clearly targeting Jef: she has expressed her dislike for him since January, Jerica then removed my
oost the moming of September 4 and only howrs late | received your call excluding lll~again with no
specific information.

(am also formally filing a bullying complaint against players and MBM who have repeatetly targeled
WBE physically throwing him to the ground and verbally harassing him ("you suck,” “you don't belong’)

if unverifledcomplaints agains Ml warrant his immediate exclusion, then by your own standard these players
must also be suapended from practice pending investigation.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 804 of the Rehabilltation Act, and Massachusetts
anti-discrimination law {including M.G.L. c. 1818 and applicable public-accommodations statutes), chidren with
disabilties are enttied to equal participation in community programs. Excludingllllitnout a transparent process,
reasonable accommodations, and consistent explanations risks disability discrimination. Extending exclusion io me
preventing my attendance while ray other chikiren practiog—appears retaliatory.

Accordingly, | request the following in writing:
{. Copies of all written reports/complaints that led oll § exclusion.
2. Aclear timeline of whan these reports were made, by whom, and how they were documented,

3, The league's written policies and procedures for handing complaints, investigalions, and disciplinary
decisions, including any appeal process,

4, Confirmation that my bulying complaint agains MIM an dll i! be investigated with equa
seriousness, including their temporary suspension pending the outcome.

5. Clarification on why Jeff was banned from attending practices without any direct communication to parents
regarding the accusation against him.

6. Confirmation that | am permitted to attend ovacticas with my other children whie the matter is pending.

Please respond in writing no later than five (8) business days from today, and preserve all related documents and
communications, including reports, emails, texts, intemal messages, and coaci notes concerning Ml, Jeff, and

my farily,

https: dima google compat) MedSGeBt 8Mdvienmptbensretic. implamag-h IBA IRIPBIS TIED balenciaga IBPGORSSTTN? Raga dal b
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 52 of 96
Sincerely,

Michelle Gauvin
(508) 826-7809

ittos: {fowl gongie. commimalyurg he abbaQd Q00bv nuentbanarche. implomagel BE7S3/6I8 TAGNI8 Basiontcmag orb TAAB SITE, Page Saf 8
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 53 of 96
Case 4:25-CV-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 54 of 96

Michelle Gauvin and Jeff Berkowitz Expulsion from Wachusett Youth Football

John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyc.org> Fri, Sep §, 2028 at 822 Pid
To: Michelle Gauvin <qauvinmb6@gmall.com>. jeff berkowitz <jelf_berkowltz@yahoo.com>, Tom Galvin
<ypQwachusettyte.org>, Chris Phelps <flex@wachusettyfe.crg>, Leah Leahy <markeling@wachusetiyfe.crg>

Michele and Jeff,

{ received a call today from the Sterling recreation department alerting me of your report, They mentioned that we
__ (Wachusett) were handing the situation correctly and did not believe you had a basis t¢ claim discrimination,

| spoke to the board about your action and we unanimously agree that your unprovoked attempt to hinder the
organization’s abilty to function in Sterling wil not be tolerated.

We voted unanimously to remove you both, I MIMa sd MIM from the program. As a sign of good faith we wil
offer a refund for the kids in exchange for the retum of all equipment,

Please coordinate the return with Ben, Chris of myself.

John Mandracchia <president@wachuseltyic org Fri, Sep §, 2028 al 6:28 PM
To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinnB@igmall com>, jeff berkowitz <jeif berkowite@yahoo. com>, Tom Galvin
<vp@wachusettylc.arg>, Chris Phelps <flex@wachusattytc.org>. Leah Leahy <marketing@wachusettyic.org>

=e

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinméG@gmai. com Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 6:46 PM
To: John Mandracchia <president@wachusettylc. org

What abou i have every right fo cal the town to get clarification...
Sent irom my iPhone

On Sep §, 2028, at 6:28 PM, John Mandracchia <x

John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyic. org> Fri, Sep 5, 2026 at 7:10 PM
To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@ gmail.com>

Atinsftna’l googie comm mailinsd/ tue Gba AB lbuimanpehaaarehe, mmlerag-erBOhOSIsGaSUORO MA Sksenpeman SEG INRAI STIG = Rage Late
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 55 of 96

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinmaé@gmal.com> Fri, Sep 5. 2026 at 7.19 PM
To: John Mandracchia <president@wachusattyfe.org>

So why nottamlic MMP They have done nothing wrong... | have cone nothing wrong... so tis al seems retaiaton
agains! me, just ike not allowing me to bving my Kids to practice’ | am willing fc look past this but | want my kids the
opportunity to pray football.

John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyle.org> Fr, Sep 5, 2025 at 9:4
To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm88@gmail. com>

I'm going fo set up a cal for 10am Google meet tomorrow to talk this over with you, Jeff and Keith.

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinmeéG@gmail. com> Fri, Sap 5, 2025 at 9:52 PM
To: John Mandracchia <president@wachusattyfc. org>

(reach out to my lawyer to see df he can attend Ill let you know
Sent from my (Phone

On Sep §, 2025, at 949 PM, John Mandracchia <oescer

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@gmail.com Fri, Sep §, 2025 at 10:32 PM
To: Michelle Gauvin <GauvinmB8@gmall.com>
Ce: John Mandracchia <president@wachusettytc.org>

My Layer has previous obligations and request that we have a meeting on Monday. | am attaching his contact
information so you're aware of who my lawyer is and fo send hier the invitation for Monday. lf gou are willng to
postpone this " Kick out “lor our kids we would aporéciate ff they could participate in Sunday's game, as they have
done nothing wrong,
Sent from my (Phone

On Sep §, 2025, at 9:52 PM, Michelle Gawyia <2

Ii reach out ta my lawyer fo see # he can attend 11! fel you know

John Mandracchia <president@wachusetty'c.org> Fr, Sep 5, 2028 at 10:49 PM
To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinmaG@gmail com>

hitge:tinail gongle. sominalll yea SCs 10 Gdiviewspthewsrche. .mplemsgemerACOQGS MBRAINNO 179 Shesiplomag- F184 28 gBB60 752004 29 Pane Toth
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page56 of 96

We are offering a meeting at a time that works for us, :
Monday we have work and we have our standard board meeting, 4
{fa lawyer wants to call me !'d be happy chat but we're not postponing anything ————x
Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@gmail. com> Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 8:31 AM

To: John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyfc. org>

We iwill not be at the meeting with out our legal representation
Sent from my iPhone

EXHIBIT
On Sep 5, 2025, at 10:50 PM, John Mandracchia <prasident@wactusetiyic.org> wrote! j T
§

John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyfc. org> Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 9:03 AM
To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@gmail.com>, Leah Leahy <marketing@wachusettyfc.org>, Ben Bachant
<foothalldir@wachusettyfc.org>, Keith Lovejoy <kelth lovejoy@gmail. com>

Michelle,

We will be proceeding with the meeting. If any parties elect not to show up it will be noted and stil processed as voted
on by the board,

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@gmail.com> Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 9:07 AM
To: John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyfe.org>, Peter Farrell <pfarrell@farrelliavin.com>

Ce: Leah Leahy <marketing@wachusettytc.org>, Ben Bachant <footballdin@wachusettyfc.org>, Keith Lovejoy
<KeithJovejoy@gmail. com>

| don't believe you will be changing your decision so please advise to the agenda of the meeting. XHIBIT
Sent from my iPhone
1 ok
On Sep 6, 2025, at 9:04 AM, John Mandracchia <oresiden:@Qnactuseliyli.org> wrote: ———
Leah Leahy <marketing@wachusettyfc.org> Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 10:05 AM

To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm&6@gmail.com>
Ce: John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyfc.org>, Peter Farrell <pfarrell@farrelliavin.com>, Ben Bachant

nitps:|/mall. google com/mailuj2/tik=456a841800Qview=pt&search=...mplemsg-a:r800086 145550060178 3&simalzmsg-F:1842523864752280728 Page Sof 4
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 57 of 96

Michelle Gauvin <gauvinmB6@gmail. com> Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 10:06 AM
To: Leah Leahy <markeling@wachusetty'c.org>
| EXHIBIT

1 6

As I've told John no we will not be coming with out my lawyer present,

Leah Leahy <marketing@wachusettyfe.org>
To: Michelle Gauvin <gauvinm86@gmail.com>

Ok the last email made it seem like you were.

huins:/fmall.google.com/mailfu/2/*iks45Ga84 1GO0Rviewsptasearche .mplemsg-arrB000861455600801783asimplzmsg-f1842523068762284728 Page 4 af 4
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 58 of 96
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 59 of 96

sroovomomn PORWAITEG MESSAGE -——eeeen
From: Keith Loveloy <keith lovejoy@qmail. com>
Date: Sat, Sep 6, 2025, 16:08
Subject: Re: llliend MMM Gauvin football
fK To: John Mandracchia <president@wachusetty’c.org>

| Dp! wish we could have come to a amicable resolution as my children have put in alot of work. And were devastated
upon finding out they wouldn't be allowed to remain with the team,

On Sat, Sep 6, 2025, 15:58 Keith Lovejoy <keith laveloy@gmall. com> wrote:
lunderstand you are all volunteers, That being said, I'm disheartened that my children have to be punished for
something their parent did.

EX On Sat, Sep 6, 2025, 15:48 John Mandracchia <president@wachusettytc. org wrote:
Hi Keith,

1 G {ts oxay, | know it was short notice for you and it probably feels a little out of the blue.

There's a long story but after we found out that we were reported to the state and to the town of Sterling by
Michelle and Jeff, we unanimously decided that we do not want to offer solution. If we allow their kids to play, it
would the the door open for them to make baseless claims and fo be disrespectful to our board and coaching
staff.

I'm sorry that it came to this. The board would have hoped to resolve this. However, we are a group of volunteer
parents that are simply trying to do what's best for everyone.

Thanks
“John Mandracchia
WYFCC President

On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 9:37 AM Keith Lovejoy <kelth Joveloy@gmall.com> wrote:
b | { will not be able to make the meeting today, im sorry. | was given less than a days notice of this meeting. | can
not change my plans to accommodate this meeting. Again | apologize.

On Fri, Sep 5, 2025, 21:50 John Mandracchia <president@wachusettylc.org> wrote:
| can explain more tomorrow at 10am with a few other board members. |l send the Google meet now

On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 8:47 PM Keith Lovejoy <keith lovejoy@gmail. com> wrote:

Ly A, it has come to my attention that my sons are being terminated from the Wachusett 10U team. As it was
explained fo me their mother Michelle and the board had some issues, | would like for someone to explain
io me why my Sons are being punished for a supposed slight of their mother. Also their younger brother is
being allowed to continue to participate with his team even though Michelle is his parent. | believe itis not

httpa://mall google, com/mal//u/2)7iked SdaG4 1B 0GAviewspthsnarchs..og damsget 184 2630906442124 744 Bsimplemsg-41842030996442124744 Page { ot 2
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 60 of 96

ttps jimell google. com/anallfuf2/Mk=456084 180 0Rviewnptbsearshs...sgidemnag-f1B4269000644212474 4b slniphemnsg 1184263008544 2124744 Page 2 of 2
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 61 of 96
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25

We just received this from the board,
Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyfc.org>
Date: September 15, 2025 at 5:36:37 PM EDT

To: Michelle Gauvin <Gauvinm86@gmail.com>, Ben Bachant

Page 62 of 96

<footballdir@wachusettyfc.org>, Leah Leahy <marketing@wachusettyfc.org>, jeff

berkowitz <jeff_berkowitz@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Equipment Return & Refund

Michelle and Jeff,

The football equipment remains league property. If they are not returned by this Friday,
9/19/26, the league will pursue further steps including replacement cost recovery and, if
necessary, a report with local authorities for lost/stolen property or a civil claim to recover

costs.

On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 10:44PM John Mandracchia <president@wachusettyfc.org>

wrote:
Michelle,

The email that | sent you earlier tonight states that the cost of the jersey is deducted
-from the offered refund. Essentially, you paid for the jerseys and we are not asking for
them back. Please return the equipment (shoulder pads and helmets) to the Sterling

Police department,
John

Michelle and Jeff,

As a follow up to my previous email, please see the instructions below for next steps on

how to return the equipment and receive your refund
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 63 of 96

Thanks
-John Mandracchia

On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 10:32PM Michelle Gauvin <qauvinm86@gmail.com> wrote:
After discussion with my lawyer... We will need the equipment for the boys to wear for
when they are interviewed by the press in their WFYC jerseys...

Sent from my iPhone

This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this
email as spam.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 64 of 96
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 65 of 96
It has come to our attention that a social media post has been
circulating, claiming that a child was removed from our league due to a
diagnosis of autism. We want to make it unequivocally clear that WYFC
would never ask any child to leave our program based on a diagnosis or
any condition. Our mission Is fo provide a safe, inclusive, and supportive
environment for all athletes, as long as they are able to participate safely
in Our program.

To set the record straight, the decision to ask this family to leave was not
related to their child or children. It was due to the parents’ actions, which
violated our Code of Conduct. Each year, we require all parents and
guardians to sign this Code of Conduct before conditioning camp begins.
This policy is in place to ensure a smooth and positive season, with the
focus remaining on the development and well-being of our athletes.

When someone violates the Code of Conduct, itis at our discretion to
take appropriate action, including asking them to leave the program. This
Standard is clearly outlined in the Code of Conduct, and we are
committed to upholding it.

We hope this statement clarifies the situation and allows us to move
forward with a successful and drama-free season, focused on what truly
matters: the growth, development, and safety of our athletes.

Thank you for your understanding and continued support.
Sincerely,
John Mandracchia and Leahy Leahy

President and VP, Wachusett Youth Football and Cheer
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 66 of 96

Sign In Terms of Use « Privacy Policy
Visit your Communication Preferences to unsubscribe,
© 2025 SportsEngine. All Rights Reserved.

This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this
email as spam.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 67 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E-FILED

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, individually and as
parents and next friends of their minor
children,

Plaintiffs,
C.A. No.:

Vv.

WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL
AND CHEER, INC.,

Defendants. ( 3 )

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER

In accordance with the provisions of Rule 4C of the Mass. R. Civ. P., the
undersigned hereby moves this Honorable Court to issue an order appointing David Ayles

and QuickServ/Allstate as process server in the above-entitled action.

The undersigned swears to the best of his knowledge and belief that the person to
be appointed process server is a Constable and a qualified and knowledgeable person in

the service of court process, is 18 years of age or over, and is not a party to this action.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

October 2, 2025

Document 2-3

Filed 10/14/25 Page 68 of 96

Respectfully submitted,

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, Individually and as Parents and
Next Friend of Their Minor Children,

By their attorney,

Petar. S. Farnrsle

Peter S. Farrell (BBO #656512)
Farrell Law Group PLLC

46 Railroad Avenue, Suite 204
Duxbury, MA 02332

Tel: (781) 236-3620
plarrell(@farrelllavin.com

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 69 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E-FILED

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, individually and as
parents and next friends of their minor
children,

Plaintiffs,

Vv.

WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL
AND CHEER, INC.,
Defendants.

SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.

C.A. No.:

(4)

PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY EX PARTE MOTION FOR SHORT ORDER OF

NOTICE

Plaintiff moves this Court pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 65(b) and Superior Court

Rule 9A(d) for entry of a Short Order of Notice to ensure that Plaintiff's Motion for

Preliminary Injunction is heard on an expedited basis. The substantive motion, as is set

forth in the Verified Complaint is predicated upon the exclusion of three minor children,

one of whom is disabled, from playing youth football. The football season is well

underway and it is critical that the preliminary injunction be heard and decided forthwith.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that the Court issue an Order directing

Defendants to appear and show cause on an expedited basis why the relief sought should

not be granted.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

October 2, 2025

Document 2-3

Filed 10/14/25 Page 70 of 96

Respectfully submitted,

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, Individually and as Parents and
Next Friend of Their Minor Children,

By their attorney,

Peter S. Farrell (BBO #656512)
Farrell Law Group PLLC

46 Railroad Avenue, Suite 204
Duxbury, MA 02332

Tel: (781) 236-3620
plarrell(@farrelllavin.com

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 71 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E-FILED

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, individually and as
parents and next friends of their minor

children,
Plaintiffs,

Vv.

WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL
AND CHEER, INC.,
Defendants.

SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.

C.A. No.:

(9)

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

NOW COME the Plaintiffs Michelle Gauvin and Jeffrey Berkowitz, individually

and as parents and next friends of their minor children, who respectfully move this Court,

pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 65, for the entry of a Preliminary Injunction against

Defendant Wachusett Youth Football and Cheer, Inc. (““WYFC”).

As set forth in the Verified Complaint, the exhibits thereto, and the accompanying

Memorandum of Law, WYFC has engaged in unlawful discrimination, retaliation,

intimidation, and coercion by excluding Plaintiffs’ children from participation in youth

football and by issuing coercive threats against their parents. Plaintiffs have demonstrated

a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their claims, actual and imminent

irreparable harm absent immediate judicial intervention, and that both the balance of

harms and the public interest weigh decisively in their favor.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 72 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter a Preliminary
Injunction as follows:

1. Ordering the immediate reinstatement of Plaintiffs’ children to full
participation in the WYFC football program;

2. Enjoining WYFC, its officers, directors, agents, and affiliates from engaging in
any further acts of discrimination, retaliation, intimidation, or coercion against
Plaintiffs and their children;

3. Requiring WYFC to provide reasonable accommodations and modifications to
its policies, practices, and procedures to ensure equal access for children with
disabilities consistent with federal and state law;

4. Prohibiting WYFC from disseminating false, disparaging, or retaliatory
statements against Plaintiffs and their family;

5. Awarding Plaintiffs their costs and attorneys’ fees as permitted by law; and

6. Granting such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ

Individually and as Parents and Next Friends of
Their Minor Children

By their attorney,

Peter S. Farrell (BBO #656512)
Farrell Law Group PLLC

46 Railroad Avenue, Suite 204
Duxbury, MA 02332

Tel: (781) 236-3620
pfarrell@farrelllavin.com

Dated: October 2, 2025
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 73 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E-FILED

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY |
BERKOWITZ, individually and as
parents and next friends of their minor
children,

Plaintiff,
aintiff, C.A. No.:

Vv.

WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL
AND CHEER, INC., | (5 | )
Defendants. .

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs Michelle Gauvin and Jeffrey Berkowitz, on behalf of their minor children,
ages 10, 10, and 6, seek a preliminary injunction to enjoin Defendant, Wachusett Youth
Football and Cheer, Inc. (“WYFC”) from continuing to exclude their children from
participation in its youth football program. The exclusion is rooted in disability
discrimination, retaliation for protected conduct following complaints of unlawful
discrimination on the basis of disability, and unlawful denial of access to a place of public
accommodation. These unlawful acts have also cascaded and escalated into breach of
contract, defamation, and violations of the Plaintiffs’ civil rights under both state and

federal law.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 74 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

Without immediate injunctive relief, Plaintiffs’ children will permanently lose the
ability to participate in the Fall 2025 football season—a season that is already underway.
Football is far more than just a sport—it is a proving ground where young people learn
discipline, perseverance, and how to push through challenges together. Beyond the field,
its true value lies in shaping character: instilling teamwork, accountability, and resilience
that carry forward into school, friendships, and every aspect of life. The Verified
Complaint and record establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits,
demonstrate irreparable harm to the children absent injunctive relief, and show that the

balance of equities and public interest weigh overwhelmingly in the Plaintiffs’ favor.

Il. STATEMENT OF FACTS

The Plaintiffs, Michelle Gauvin and Jeffrey Berkowitz, are domestic partners
residing in Worcester County, Massachusetts (Verf. Complaint at ¥ 1). Ms. Gauvin is the
parent and legal guardian of three minor children, two of whom—Child 1 and Child 2—
have been diagnosed with Autism, while Child 3 is not diagnosed with Autism (Verf.
Complaint at § 1). Mr. Berkowitz is the parent of Child 4, who is not diagnosed with
Autism, and also serves as the stepparent to Children 1-3 (Verf. Complaint at § 1).
Together, these four children were enrolled or eligible to participate in the Wachusett
Youth Football and Cheer, Inc. (““WYFC”) program (Verf. Complaint at { 6).

WYFC is a Massachusetts nonprofit corporation that operates youth football and
cheerleading programs in Worcester County, with its principal address in Rutland,
Massachusetts (Verf. Complaint at § 3). The organization runs its programs at the Griffin

Road Athletic Complex (“GRAC”) in Sterling, Massachusetts, a municipally owned
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 75 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

facility that, together with WYFC, qualifies as a place of public accommodation under G.L.
c. 272, §§ 92A, 98, and 98A (Verf. Complaint at 4] 9-13).

In July 2025, Ms. Gauvin entered into a contract with WYFC for her son, Child 1,
to participate in football, paying the $300 registration fee and submitting all required forms
(Verf. Complaint at 4 4). Child 1 had already played football for WYFC for three
consecutive seasons without incident, and the 2025 season would have been his fourth
(Verf. Complaint at J 14). Despite his Autism diagnosis, Child 1 was medically cleared to
play, and the family had consistently supported WYFC, with both Mr. Berkowitz and Child
1’s grandfather volunteering as coaches (Verf. Complaint at J] 14-21).

At the start of the 2025 season, Child 1 regularly attended practices without issue
(Verf. Complaint at § 21). On September 3, 2025, however, WYFC President John
Mandracchia abruptly informed the Plaintiffs that Child 1 could not attend practice due to
unspecified “complaints” (Verf. Complaint at § 27). Later that evening, Mandracchia
changed his explanation, claiming that Child 1 had threatened to “gouge out eyeballs”
(Verf. Complaint at J 44). Despite repeated requests, no documentation was ever provided,
and Mandracchia failed to consider that, even if the comment had been made, it was more
likely than not a manifestation of Child 1’s disability (Verf. Complaint at 4] 45-47).

September 3, WYFC Football Director Ben Bachant made discriminatory remarks
about Child 1, stating that he “did not seem to want to be there,” was “unsafe on the line,”
and might “have a breakdown on the field,” comments that directly questioned Child 1’s
fitness to play based on his disability (Verf. Complaint at §] 25). These remarks contradicted
the positive feedback Child | had received from his head coach just one day earlier (Verf.

Complaint at { 26). Later in the afternoon, WYFC Fundraising and Marketing Director
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 76 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

Leah Leahy, joined by Mandracchia and Bachant, confronted Ms. Gauvin at practice and
informed her that because Child 1 was excluded, she could not remain to watch her other
children (Verf. Complaint at {/[ 41-43). Leahy further asserted that Child 1 posed a “safety
issuc” because teammates might “choose not to block for him” (Verf. Complaint at 4] 43).

Almost immediately, WYFC and its affiliates escalated their retaliatory actions.
Coach Patterson accused Mr. Berkowitz of “abusing” Child 3, triggering a bad-faith and
ultimately unsupported 51A child abuse report (Verf. Complaint at J] 39-40). At the same
time, Child 1 endured bullying by Player 1 and Player 2, who told him “you suck” and “you
don’t belong,” yet WYFC took no action against them, instead focusing its efforts on
excluding Child 1 from the program (Verf. Complaint at 4 28-33).

On September 4, 2025, Ms. Gauvin contacted the Recreation Director of the Town
of Sterling, who confirmed that she had every right to attend practices and games at GRAC
(Vert. Complaint at 4] 54-56). That same day, she wrote to the WYFC Board of Directors,
reminding them of Child 1’s disability and WYFC’s obligations under the ADA, Section
504, and Massachusetts law, while also requesting documentation and reasonable
accommodations (Verf. Complaint at ff 35-36). WYFC never responded (Verf. Complaint
at § 37).

On September 6, 2025, Mandracchia admitted in an email to Child 1 and Child 2’s
biological father, Keith Lovejoy, that WYFC’s decision to exclude the children came after
the Plaintiffs had reported the matter to the Town of Sterling and the state (Verf. Complaint
at { 68). That same day, Plaintiffs were notified that not only was Child 1 banned, but Child

2 and Child 4 were also excluded, leaving only Child 3 permitted to continue—on the
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 77 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

condition that he was accompanied by his biological father, a WYFC coach, and not by
Ms. Gauvin (Verf. Complaint at § 63 and Exhibits 6A-6M).

In addition to these exclusions, Mandracchia sent coercive and threatening emails
to the Plaintiffs demanding the immediate return of WYFC-issued football equipment
(Verf. Complaint at § 75). In one such email, he stated that if the equipment was not
returned by a specified date, WYFC would report the equipment as “stolen” to the police
and file a civil action to recover replacement costs (Verf. Complaint at J 75). The tone of
these emails was overtly hostile, designed to intimidate, coerce, and punish the Plaintiffs
for asserting their rights and for reporting WYFC’s conduct to municipal and state
authorities (Verf. Complaint at 9 54-56, 60).

Atno time did WYFC identify any violation of its Code of Conduct or other policies
(Verf. Complaint at #9] 58-59). Instead, its actions reflected retaliation against the Plaintiffs
for their advocacy and unlawful discrimination against both the children and Ms. Gauvin
(Verf. Complaint at [| 60-63). WYFC also engaged in sex discrimination against Ms.
Gauvin by conditioning Child 3’s continued participation on his being accompanied only
by his biological father, and not by her (Verf. Complaint at { 63).

On September 12, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed a charge of discrimination with the
Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (“MCAD”) and promptly sought
expedited removal to Superior Court (Verf. Complaint at § 73). Recognizing the urgency
of the matter, the Investigating Commissioner granted the request, leading to the present

action (Verf. Complaint at 7 74).
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 78 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

Il. LEGAL STANDARD

A preliminary injunction under Mass. R. Civ. P. 65 should issue where the moving
party demonstrates: (1) a likelihood of success on the merits; (2) a likelihood of irreparable
harm absent relief; and (3) that the balance of harms favors the moving party. See

Packaging Industrics Group, Inc. v. Cheney, 380 Mass. 609, 616-17 (1980). Courts also

consider the public interest. Injunctive relief is particularly warranted where denial will

result in the loss of rights that cannot be restored through monetary damages alone.

IV. LEGAL ARGUMENT

A. The Plaintiffs Are Likely To Succeed On The Merits Of Their Claims

1. The Plaintiffs Are Likely to Succeed on the Merits of Count III Because
They Can Show a Prima Facie Case of Disability Discrimination Under
The Americans With Disability Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 and G.L. c. 151B

To state a prima facie case of disability discrimination in the non-employment
context, a plaintiff must demonstrate that: (1) they are an individual with a disability as
defined by the ADA; (2) they are qualified or otherwise eligible to participate in or benefit
from the defendant’s services, programs, or activities; (3) they were excluded from
participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination by the
defendant; and (4) the exclusion, denial, or discrimination occurred by reason of their

disability. Parker v. Universidad de Puerto Rico, 225 F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 2000) (Title ID;

PGA Tour, Inc, v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661, 674-75 (2001) (Title II).

Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 79 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

a. The Defendant’s Claim The Parents Violated The Code Of Conduct is a
Pretext Because Such Claims Were Made After The Plaintiffs Asserted Their
Complaints
On September 3, 2025, Football Director Ben Bachant made remarks that

specifically implied Child 1 was not suitable to play football based on his disability
(autism) including: “Doesn’t seem like he wants to be here”; “Doesn’t put in much effort”;
“Ts unsafe on the line”; “He freezes on the line and is a danger to himself”; “Is he mentally
mature enough to be on a team?” [recall, Child 1 is ten years old]; and “What if he has a
breakdown on the field?” See Verf. Comp. 725. Shortly thereafter, the Defendant barred

Child 1 from football activities and provided no specifics of the basis for Child 1’s

exclusion. See Verf. Comp. 427.

The Plaintiffs immediately communicated and voiced their objection to the action
taken by the Defendant to exclude Child 1. See Verf. Comp. "34-44. To date, despite
repeated demands for specifics and details regarding what the Defendants describe as a
breach of the “Code of Conduct,” no specific details or response was forthcoming either
before or after suit was filed. Verf. Comp. {] 47-49. For the Defendant to state the
Plaintiffs’ conduct violated to the Code of Conduct is a pretext and arose after the Plaintiffs
asserted that WYFC acted unlawfully by discriminating against Child who had played

football with WYFC for the prior three seasons without incident.

2. The Plaintiffs Are Likely To Succeed on the Merits of Count IV Because
They Can Show A Prima Facie Case of Retaliation For Asserting Rights
Against Discriminatory Animus Based on Disability

To prove a claim of retaliation, a plaintiff must satisfy the elements of the

McDonnell-Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 804-805 (1973) burden-shifting test.

See Verdrager v. Mintz, Levin, Cohn. Ferris. Glovsky & Popeo, P.C, 474 Mass. 382, 406,

7
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 80 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

50 N.E.3d 778 (2016) (applying burden-shifting analysis to plaintiff's retaliation claim).
Pursuant to this analysis, the initial burden is on the plaintiff to establish his/her prima facie
case. Id. "To make out [a] prima facie case [for retaliation under G. L. c. 15 IB, § 4(4), the
plaintiff] [must] show that he engaged in protected conduct, that he suffered some adverse
action, and that a causal connection existed between the protected conduct and the adverse

action.” Osborne-Trussell v. Children's Hosp. Corp., 488 Mass. 248, 260, 172 N.E.3d 737

(2021).

In the case here, in their role as parents, the Plaintiffs complained and advocated
regarding the unlawful and discriminatory treatment of Child 1. See Verf. Comp. 434-44.
Complaining about acts of unlawful discrimination on the basis of disability is protected
conduct and activity. As a result, the Plaintiffs and their children suffered an adverse
reaction (being banned from football altogether) and very clearly, this ban was the result
of the protected conduct because the Defendant, by and through its agent, Mandracchia,
admitted in writing, that the Defendant was not interested in a “solution” because Ms.
Gauvin not only wrote to the Board of WYFC, she raised the same complaints of unlawful
discrimination and exclusion to the Town of Sterling Director of Recreation, Tyler Riel,
and the state. See Verf. Comp. {[§{54-68. Accordingly, based on this evidence and
irrefutable written record, the Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim for retaliation.

As stated and set forth above, the Defendant’s specious and self-serving claim that
the Plaintiffs violated the “Code of Conduct” is a pretextual shield. The real reason for the
“ban” of the Plaintiffs and their family is the Defendant and its cadre of three “leaders” did

not like being challenged by the Plaintiffs or questioned by town officials for their unlawful
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 81 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

discrimination which was caused by their own behavior and choices. See Verf. Comp.
68:

Mandracchia responded again, this time at 3:48 PM on Saturday, September
6: “It’s okay, I know it was short notice for you and it probably feels a little
out of the blue. There is a long story but after we found out that we were
reported to the state and to the Town of Sterling by Michelle and Jeff, we
unanimously decided that we do not want to offer a solution. If we allow
their kids to play, it would the the [sic] door open for them to make baseless
claims and to be disrespectful to our board and coaching staff.

See Verf. Comp. at Exhibit 7C.

3. The Plaintiffs Are Likely To Succeed On the Merits of Count V Because
They Can Show A Prima Facie Case of Discrimination In A Place of
Public Accommodation Under the ADA and G.L. c. 272

A plaintiff has three elements to establish for a prima facie case of discrimination
in a place of public accommodation: (1) plaintiffis a member of a protected category under
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 98, and (2) plaintiff was denied access to or restricted in the

use of (3) a place of public accommodation. See Soltys v. Wellesley Country Club, 15

Mass. L. Rep. 650 at *20 (Norfolk Superior Court, 2002).

In the case sub judice, Child | is a qualified individual with a disability, medically
cleared to participate in youth football. Verf. Comp. at 4 2. Defendant WYFC, is a private
entity operating a community sports program at a municipally owned facility and thus is a
place of public accommodation under Title Ill and a program subject to Title H when
utilizing municipal facilities. Verf. Comp. at 9¥ 3, 7-13. As a result of the Plaintiffs
complaints regarding unlawful discrimination against Child 1, the Plaintiffs other children
(Child 2 and Child 4) were denied the opportunity to participate in football—an opportunity
they had successfully exercised in prior years—solely after Defendant’s leadership cited

conduct by Child 1 directly tied to his disability. Verf. Comp. at 4] 14-18.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 82 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

It is this one episode that cascaded and escalated into a bizarre and pitched battle
where the Defendant retaliated — and banned not only Child 1 — but his siblings (Child 2
and 4 )— and their parents from any football activities. Verf. Comp. at Jf] 48-53. The initial
exclusion of Child 1 constitutes discrimination within the meaning of the ADA. The
exclusion of Children 2 and 4 and the Plaintiffs is an act of unlawful retaliation directly
related and tied to their vocal objection to the Defendant’s unlawful actions, objections of
which are protected activity and conduct under both state and federal law. Verf. Comp. at
4 56.

Title IM explicitly prohibits a public accommodation from denying individuals with
disabilities “the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages, or accommodations” it provides. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a). Accordingly, in
accordance with those verified allegations, signed under the pains and penalties of perjury,
coupled with the Defendants own words documented in ill-advised emails, the Plaintiffs
have shown a prima facie case of discrimination in a place of public accommodation.

a. The Defendant Failed To Provide Reasonable Accommodations or
Modifications To Policies, Practices and Procedures To Avoid
Discriminatory Exclusion of Child 1 Based on His Disability

Title II and Title If] require reasonable modifications to policies, practices, or
procedures when necessary to avoid discrimination, unless the entity demonstrates that the

modification would “fundamentally alter” the nature of the service or program. 42 U.S.C.

§ 12182(b)(2)(A)Gi); PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. at 682.

The Defendant has made no such showing here and cannot make any such showing.
First, this is ten-year old youth football. It is a far cry from high-velocity impact varsity

sports at the high school or college level. The Defendant’s program necessarily involves

10
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 83 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

catering to young men, in this case ages 10, 10 and 6, and all the challenges, joys, teaching
moments, support, education, teamwork, commitment and drive: all attributes that are not
measurable in any form that can be compensated with money.

Second, the Defendants cannot explain how Child 1 participated for the last three
years, started this year (in July), and somehow now is being excluded due to allegations
Child 1 made a statement first reported as “I’Il gouge your eyeballs out” or words to that
effect. "True threats’ encompass statements where the speaker means to communicate
a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular
individual or group of individuals." See M.H. v. E.R.M., 92 Mass. App. Ct. 1120 (2017) at

3 citing O'Brien v. Boroski, 461 Mass. 415, 423 (2012) quoting from Virginia v. Black,

538 U.S. 343 (2003). "Intimidation" qualifies as a true threat "where a speaker directs a
threat to a person or group of persons with the intent of placing the victim in fear of bodily
harm or death." O'Brien, supra at 425, quoting from Black, supra at 360. Unlike fighting
words, true threats can be communicated through intermediaries if the defendant intends

for the threat to reach the victim. See Commonwealth v. Walters, 472 Mass. 680, 693-694

(2015).

The Defendant is a purveyor of ten-year-olds on a football field training for a rough
and physical game that by its nature involves physical contact, aggressiveness, and mental
toughness. A 10-year-old who, assuming arguendo said, “I'll gouge your eyes out,” in no
way, shape or form constitutes a “true threat.” Now add the fact the purported offender is
autistic. Setting aside the Defendants were required to engage in an interactive process and
to consider reasonable accommodations to Child 1, to claim this alleged exchange is

disqualifying conduct or a “true threat” is absurd. None of the alleged messages

11
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 84 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

communicates a threat to commit an act of unlawful violence or an intent to place anyone
in fear of bodily harm or death.
b. Massachusetts State Law Mandates Full Enjoyment of the
Accommodations, Advantages, Facilities And Privileges Of Any Place of
Public Accommodation
Massachusetts law provides overlapping and independent protections. Chapter
151B prohibits discrimination “because of the handicap of any person” in “the full
enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of
public accommodation.” G.L. c. 151B, § 4(10). Likewise, the Massachusetts Public
Accommodation Law, G.L. c. 272, §§ 92A, 98, guarantees that all persons “shall have the
right to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any
place of public accommodation” regardless of disability. Courts have recognized that these

statutes are to be construed liberally to effectuate their broad remedial purpose of

eliminating discrimination. See Lowell v. Mass. Comm’n Against Discrimination, 65

Mass. App. Ct. 356, 364 (2006).

Here, the Defendant’s actions—excluding Plaintiffs’ children from a youth sports
league for what was originally a disability-related reason pertaining to Child 1 only, while
allowing other children to continue to participate—fall squarely within the prohibitions of
these statutes. The denial of equal participation in youth football on the basis of disability
coupled with discrimination and retaliation in a place of public accommodation are
precisely the harms that both the ADA and Massachusetts law were enacted to prevent.
Additionally, the record before the Court, in the Defendant’s own words demonstrate
retaliatory conduct that is expressly stated when the Defendant intended to offer no solution

because the Plaintiffs reported the Defendant “to the town and state.”

12
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 85 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

Accordingly, Plaintiffs have more than satisfied the elements of a prima facie case
under both federal and state law, and the record establishes a strong likelihood of success

on the merits.

4, The Plaintiffs Are Likely To Succeed on The Merits of Count VI Because
They Can Show the Defendant Engaged In Threats, Intimidation and
Coercion in Violation of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act

The Defendant’s conduct goes well beyond discriminatory animus and retaliation.
Not long after the Plaintiffs exercised their protected right to complain about unlawful
discrimination, the Defendants launched a bogus and bad faith complaint for “abuse and
neglect” against Mr. Berkowitz. Verf. Comp. at fj 31-40. On September 26, 2025, the
Department of Children and Families (“DCF”) issued a finding that did not substantiate the
allegation which resulted in DCF closing “the case.” Verf. Comp. at 476.

For purposes of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, a "threat" is "the intentional
exertion of pressure to make another fearful or apprehensive of injury or harm." Planned

Parenthood League of Mass., Inc. v. Blake, 417 Mass 467, 474, cert. denied, 513 U.S. 868

(1994). "Intimidation" involves putting one "in fear for the purpose of compelling or
deterring conduct." Id. "Coercion" is the application to another of force "to constrain him
to do against his will something he would not otherwise have done." Id., quoting Deas v.
Dempsey, 403 Mass. 468, 471 (1988). Both threats and intimidation often rely on an

element of actual or threatened physical force, Ayasli v. Armstrong, 56 Mass. App. Ct. at

752, an element that is missing in this case. However, we have held that coercion is a

'In the context of what occurred here, the Defendants are not immune for reporting under
G.L. c. 119 §51A when the complaint was made and filed in bad faith. The statute
expressly provides for penalties when such reports are made in bad faith, as here.

13
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 86 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

broader category that may rely on physical, moral, or economic coercion. See Kennie v.

Natural Res. Dep't, 451 Mass. 754, 763 (2008).

In addition to the foregoing, since the Plaintiffs complaint about the unlawful and
discriminatory treatment of Child 1, they have been the target of other forms of threats,
intimidation, and coercion. For example, on September 15, 2025, John Mandracchia sent
the following email to the Plaintiffs:

The football equipment remains league property. If they are not returned

by this Friday, 9/19/26, the league will pursue further steps including

replacement cost recovery and, if necessary, a report with local authorities
for lost/stolen property or a civil claim to recover costs.

See Verified Complaint at 9/75.

This is an overt threat, plain and simple. What Mandracchia fails to grasp is that
the Plaintiffs only desire is for their two ten year olds and six year old to resume playing
football without delay and in order to do that they will need equipment. To say or assert
the Plaintiffs were attempting to steal property is not only absurd, it is actionable.

At repeated times and intervals, the Plaintiffs requested information, details,
reports, and specifics regarding the allegations against Child 1 that resulted in his exclusion
from football activities. See Verf. Comp. at 958. The Defendant refused to produce and
of this information and at all times relevant, had the power to do so. In contrast, the power
differential between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants is apparent. The Defendant alleges
that it has all the information and that it will be provided (Verf. Comp. at Jj 51 and Ex.
5D) and yet failed time after time to produce anything. In one exchange, Mandracchia
stated that if a “punishment” was imposed, they could appeal the decision—a hollow
remedy given the unilateral control WYFC retained. Most telling was Mandracchia’s

statement, “I would like to remind you that this is a private club. The board has the nght to

14
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 87 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

remove children and parents if we feel it is in the best interest of the organization,”
underscoring his retaliatory posture and the board’s disregard for equal access. Verf.
Comp. at { 52. This statement is, by definition, threats, intimidation and coercion and an
unveiled attempt by the Defendant to have the Plaintiffs give up and leave the program.

In another exchange, Mandracchia admitted in writing that the exclusion of the
family was in retaliation against Ms. Gauvin and Mr. Berkowitz, thereby confirming the
discriminatory motives underlying WYFC’s actions. Verf. Comp. at § 68 and Ex. 7C.

Threats, intimidation, and coercion is further reflected in WYFC’s “Official
Statement,” authored by Mandracchia, which expressly states that the Plaintiffs violated
the Defendant’s Code of Conduct. See Verf. Comp. 477 and Ex.9. This is pretext for the
Defendants actions. This is pretext for the Defendants actions. Moreover, this language
demonstrates the league’s intent to deflect blame while disparaging the Plaintiffs in yet
another display of threats, intimidation, and coercion.

Finally, in an email exchange regarding scheduling, Mandracchia refused to
accommodate Ms. Gauvin (or Mr. Lovejoy’s) ability to attend a meeting scheduled with
less than one-days’ notice, insisting that the meeting would go forward regardless. See
Verf. Comp. 967 and Ex. 6E -6F; 6I-6L. This inflexible stance confirmed that the board
had already made up its mind, and that it had no genuine interest in considering Ms. Gauvin

and Mr. Berkowitz’s perspective. Id.

B. The Plaintiffs Will Suffer Irreparable Harm Absent Immediate Relief

The Plaintiffs and their children face actual and imminent irreparable harm that

cannot be redressed by a final judgment after a full trial. Courts have recognized that “an

15
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 88 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

irreparable injury is any harm that cannot be vindicated by litigation on the merits” and

occurs when “there is no adequate remedy at final judgment.”” Waltham Centerpoint I Inv.

Grp., LLC v. Generation Bio Co., No. 2284CV01860-BLS1, 2025 Mass. Super. LEXIS 3,

at *7 (Mass. Super. Ct. Jan. 21, 2025).

Here, the exclusion of Child 1 and his siblings from the Wachusett Youth Football
and Cheer (“WYFC”) program constitutes a loss of rights that cannot be restored
retroactively. Football is a seasonal, age-specific activity. Once the 2025 season passes,
these children will never again be ten years old or able to reclaim the unique developmental
and social benefits of playing football with their peers. No monetary award can restore
those lost experiences or undo the stigma of exclusion based on disability.

The harm to Plaintiffs is neither speculative nor remote, but actual and imminent.

See Am. Fed’n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Emps. v. Rouse, No. 02-2276, 2002 Mass. Super.

LEXIS 233, at *7 (Mass. Super. Ct. June 12, 2002) citing Sierra Club v. Larson, 769 F.

Supp. 420, 422 (D. Mass. 1991)). On Sept. 3, 2025, WYFC President John Mandracchia
informed the Plaintiffs that Child 1 could not attend practice due to vague “complaints,”
later escalating his explanation to an allegation that Child 1 threatened to “gouge out
eyeballs” (Verf. Complaint at §/f] 21-22). Shortly thereafter, WYFC officials excluded not
only Child 1, but also his siblings, despite the absence of any evidence of misconduct or
violation of league policy (Verf. Complaint at 38, 47). Compounding this exclusion,
Mandracchia issued coercive emails demanding the return of football equipment,
threatening that ifit were not returned by a date certain, WYFC would report the equipment

as “stolen” to police and pursue civil action (Verf. Complaint at §] 46). These threats created

16
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 89 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

a climate of intimidation that continues to chill Plaintiffs’ ability to advocate for their
children’s rights and underscores the immediacy of the injury.
This Court has also recognized that harms “whose value cannot readily be

quantified” are classic examples of irreparable injury. Medmarc Cas. Ins. Co. v. Harvard

Bioscience, Inc., No. 2184CV01338-BLS2, 2022 Mass. Super. LEXIS 10, at *9 (Mass.
Super. Ct. Jan. 31, 2022). The exclusion of Child 1, a child with Autism, strips him of
access to the structure, teamwork, and sense of belonging that football uniquely provides
—benefits that are central to his social and emotional development. Similarly, the
retaliatory exclusion of his siblings deprives them of the right to participate equally in a
community program, inflicting reputational stigma and emotional harm that cannot be
measured in dollars and cents. Unless this Court intervenes, the Plaintiffs and their children
will continue to suffer irreparable injury with cach passing week of the season, making

emergency injunctive relief not only appropriate but necessary.

C. The Public Interest Strongly Supports the Issuance of an Injunction

The issuance of an injunction is paramount to the public interest because it ensures
that Massachusetts’ anti-discrimination laws are enforced with the urgency and seriousness
they demand. In addition to its federal law counterparts, the Massachusetts Legislature
enacted G.L. c. 151B and G.L. c. 272, §§ 92A, 98, and 98A to eliminate discrimination in
places of public accommodation and to guarantee all persons equal access to community
programs. The Supreme Judicial Court has made clear that “the public interest in enforcing

anti-discrimination statutes supports injunctive relief.” See Currier v. Nat’l Bd. of Med.

Exam’rs, 462 Mass. 1, 12 (2012). Where the Legislature has expressed a strong policy in

17
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 90 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester

Docket Number

favor of eradicating discrimination, the courts have recognized that the public interest

weighs heavily in favor of swift judicial intervention.

That principle is directly implicated here. WYFC is a community-based youth
football program, operating on municipal grounds, and holding itself out to the public as
an organization dedicated to children and families. Its exclusion of Child 1 because of his
Autism, coupled with retaliatory exclusion of his siblings and coercive threats directed at
their parents, strikes at the core of equal access to community life. The public interest is
disserved when youth sports organizations—especially those operating on public land—
are permitted to exclude children with disabilities based on stereotypes, unfounded
complaints, or retaliation. Unless this Court acts, the message conveyed is that
discriminatory exclusion of children with disabilities will be tolerated, undermining both
the letter and spirit of the Commonwealth’s anti-discrimination framework.

Beyond this case, the broader public interest lies in sending a clear and unequivocal
message that retaliation and intimidation against families who assert their rights will not be
condoned. Mandracchia’s threats to report Plaintiffs to the police for “stolen” equipment
unless they capitulated, and his exclusion of multiple children after their parents sought
municipal intervention, exemplify precisely the type of coercive conduct that the law seeks
to deter (Verf. Complaint at { 46). Failure to enjoin such conduct not only harms these
children but also chills other families from stepping forward to enforce their rights. The
Commonwealth’s public policy of inclusivity in public accommodations and youth
programs demands that courts act swiftly and decisively to prevent the continuation of

discriminatory and retaliatory practices. By issuing an injunction, the Court will advance

18
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 91 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

the Legislature’s intent, protect vulnerable children, and ensure that community programs

remain truly open to all.

V. CONCLUSION

For all of the reasons set forth above, the Plaintiffs have more than demonstrated a
strong likelihood of success on the merits, the existence of actual and imminent irreparable
harm, and that both the balance of harms and the public interest weigh decisively in their
favor. The Defendant’s discriminatory and retaliatory actions have deprived these children
of their right to participate in youth football, inflicted stigma and exclusion that cannot be
undone, and sent an unlawful and harmful message that children with disabilities may be
denied access to community programs. Unless the Court intervenes immediately, the 2025
season will be permanently lost, and with it, the unique developmental and social
opportunities football provides at this stage of the children’s lives.

The law is clear: discrimination and retaliation in any form are intolerable under
both federal and state law, and swift judicial action is necessary to ensure that families are
not left without recourse when excluded from public accommodations. The Defendant’s
conduct—ranging from exclusion based on disability, to retaliatory bans of siblings, to
threats of police reports and civil suits—underscores the urgency of this Court’s
intervention. Equity and justice demand that these children be restored to the field without

delay, and that the Defendant be enjoined from continuing its unlawful conduct.

19
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 92 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:

1.

Order the immediate reinstatement of Plaintiffs’ children to full and equal
participation in the WYFC football program;

Enjoin WYFC, its officers, directors, agents, and affiliates from engaging
in any further acts of discrimination, retaliation, intimidation, or coercion
against Plaintiffs and their children;

Mandate reasonable accommodations and modifications to WYFC’s
policies, practices, and procedures to ensure equal access for children with
disabilities consistent with federal and state law;

Prohibit the Defendant from disseminating false, disparaging, or retaliatory
statements against the Plaintiffs and their family;

Award Plaintiffs their costs and attorneys’ fees as permitted under G.L. c.
151B, G.L. ¢. 272, and federal law; and

Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper to
fully vindicate the Plaintiffs’ rights and prevent the continuation of unlawful

practices.

20
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document 2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 93 of 96
Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

Respectfully submitted,

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, Individually and as Parents and
Next Friends of Their Minor Children

By their attorney,

ftir SS. Farnrele

Peter S. Farrell (BBO #656512)
Farrell Law Group PLLC

46 Railroad Avenue, Suite 204
Duxbury, MA 02332

Tel: (781) 236-3620

plarrell@ farrelllavin.com

Dated: October 2, 2025

21
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 94 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E-FILED

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, individually and as
parents and next friends of their minor
children,

Plaintiffs,
C.A.No.: aS8SCVIZ9-4 B

Vv.

WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL
AND CHEER, INC.,

Defendants. (3 )

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER

wav. + Tg: accordance with the provisions of Rule 4C of the Mass. R. Civ. P., the
“uridersignéd hereby moves this Honorable Court to issue an order appointing Dayid Ayles

and QuickServ/Allstate as process server in the above-entitled action.

The undersigned swears to the best of his knowledge and belief that the person to
be appointed process server is a Constable and a qualified and knowledgeable person in

the service of court process, is 18 years of age or over, and is not a party to this action.

\
Allred ote

Attest’ 27 TUstt AM,
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 95 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

E-FILED

v
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY

BERKOWITZ, individually and as

parents and next friends of their minor

children,
Plaintiffs,

CA.No: ASTSCN 1384 RB

V.

WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL
AND CHEER, INC., ( 4)
Defendants.

PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY EX PARTE MOTION FOR SHORT ORDER OF
NOTICE
Plaintiffmoves this Court pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 65(b) and Superior Court _
Rule 9A(d) for entry of a Short Order of Notice to ensure that Plaintiff's Motion for
Preliminary Injunction is heard on an expedited basis. The substantive motion, as is set
forth in the Verified Complaint is predicated upon the exclusion of three minor children,
one of whom is disabled, from playing youth football. The football season is well

underway and it is critical that the preliminary injunction be heard and decided forthwith.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that the Court issue an Order directing

Defendants to appear and show cause on an expedited basis why the relief sought should

not be granted.

“lousedl See PH. Toot DI

to/slas- lowe”: Atlesti 7, TE AGM.
Case 4:25-cv-40162-MRG Document2-3 Filed 10/14/25 Page 96 of 96

Date Filed 10/3/2025 11:00 AM
Superior Court - Worcester
Docket Number

3
s

E-FILED

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPT.

MICHELLE GAUVIN and JEFFREY
BERKOWITZ, individually and as
parents and next friends of their mimor
children,

Plaintiffs,
C.A.No.: ASISCNI3Z9-48

Vv.

WACHUSETT YOUTH FOOTBALL
AND CHEER, INC.,
Defendants.

PLAINTIFE’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

(S)

NOW COME the Plaintiffs Michelle Gauvin and Jeffrey Berkowitz, individually

and as parents and next friends of their minor children, who respectfully move this Court,
pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 65, for the entry of a Preliminary Injunction against
Defendant Wachusett Youth Football and Cheer, Inc. (““WYFC”).

As set forth in the Verified Complaint, the exhibits thereto, and the accompanying
Memorandum of Law, WYFC has engaged in unlawful discrimination, retaliation,
intimidation, and coercion by excluding Plaintiffs’ children from participation in youth
football and by issuing coercive threats against their parents. Plaintiffs have demonstrated
a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their claims, actual and imminent
irreparable harm absent immediate judicial intervention, and that both the balance of

harms and the public interest weigh deci fvely in their favor.

(gl5/2S. Cie TO 1S5vE sHoeT ORDER WOME,

© Isyee, Lena S

w/itlas @ DCO au
(2. sos stTOde Aj.

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.mad.290227.2.3.pdf

Size

6,646,202 bytes

SHA-256

40e12e3b3858798d0d1f05c51439c9dad8679a8cf69b65164731d49338be1eb6

Our copy

gov.uscourts.mad.290227.2.3.pdf

Original

www.courtlistener.com