COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW APPEALS
BUREAU OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPEALS
In Re: Student v. Longmeadow Public Schools BSEA # 2510207
RULING ON PARENT’S MOTION FOR CORRECTION, CLARIFICATION, AND COMPLETION OF FACTUAL RECORD AND LIMITED OBJECTIONS FOR APPEAL PRESERVATION
On April 27, 2026, Parent in the above referenced matter filed Parent’s Motion For Correction, Clarification, And Completion Of Factual Record And Limited Objections For Appeal Preservation, seeking “to correct, clarify, and complete the factual record in the Decision dated March 31, 2026, and to preserve limited objections.” Parent indicated that she “does not challenge the Hearing Officer’s reasoning or conclusions with this filing.” Via email dated the same day, the District responded that “BSEA hearing rules [do] not allow any motions once the decision has been rendered.”
LEGAL STANDARDS:
BSEA Hearing Rule XII(B) of the Hearing Rules for Special Education Appeals states that the Hearing Officer’s decision is the final decision of the BSEA and is not subject to further agency review. Motions to reconsider or to re-open a hearing once a decision has been issued are not permitted.
APPLICATION OF LEGAL STANDARDS:
The Decision in the underlying matter was duly issued on March 31 2026, reflecting the Hearing Officer’s findings of fact and conclusions of law based on the evidentiary record and credibility determinations. Pursuant to BSEA Hearing Rule XII(B), supra, said Decision is not subject to further agency review.[1]
Parent’s Motion is therefore DENIED.
So Ordered by the Hearing Officer,
/s/ Alina Kantor Nir
Alina Kantor Nir
Dated: April 28, 2026
Footnotes
[1] I note, however, that to the extent the Parent alleges factual inaccuracies or omissions, the Decision accurately reflects the evidence deemed relevant and credible, and no correction is warranted. Nor is a Hearing Officer required to reference every piece of evidence or address every argument raised by a party. With respect to the alleged inconsistency as to the issues for hearing and the claim that a specific issue was not decided, the Decision, read as a whole, sufficiently identifies and resolves the matters properly before the BSEA. Finally, Parent’s request to strike Section D is not supported. The discussion therein falls within the permissible scope of the Decision, including contextual or explanatory analysis of the record, and does not constitute improper adjudication of issues outside the hearing scope.