COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW APPEALS
BUREAU OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPEALS
In Re: Student v. Springfield Public Schools
BSEA # 2605261
RULING ON GUARDIAN AD LITEM'S SECOND MOTION TO AMEND HEARING REQUEST AND SPRINGFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOLS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND ENLARGEMENT OF TIME
On November 12, 2025, Student's court appointed Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) requested a Hearing in the above-referenced matter. The initial Hearing Request was amended on December 22, 2025. Following multiple motions and rulings, the issues for hearing were identified as whether Springfield Public Schools (Springfield or the District) failed to consult with GAL when providing a comparable setting for Student, and whether Springfield High School is comparable to Student's last accepted placement. The hearing was scheduled for April 1, 2026.
On March 16, 2026,[1] GAL filed an Amendment to the Hearing Request, seeking to amend the initial Hearing Request filed on November 12, 2025 by adding several claims against Springfield. Specifically, GAL asserted, in part, that Student's current placement is not a therapeutic program and, as such, is inappropriate and that Student requires door-to-door transportation.[2]
Via email dated March 17, 2026, Springfield indicated it would not object to the Motion to Amend and would respond to the new claims pursuant to the amended timelines. Springfield also filed Motion For Protective Order And Enlargement Of Time, seeking an extension of the timelines for the subpoenas Ducas Tecum and all pending discovery in this matter. Specifically, Springfield stated that Springfield does not object to the request to recalculate the BSEA timelines based on the Education GAL's filing of a Second Amendment to the Initial Hearing Request filed on or about November 12, 2025, previously amended on December 22, 2025. The District noted that on March 13, 2026, the Hearing Officer issued an order partially upholding the Subpoenas Duces Tecum requested by GAL, granting a deadline of production of emails and other materials to March 20, 2026. However, given GAL's request to recalculate the dates of Hearing and the "reset" of all BSEA timelines, Springfield seeks an enlargement of time for response to the Subpoenas Duces Tecum and the Interrogatories to April 13, 2026.
On March 18, 2026, GAL filed Response In Opposition To District's Motion For Protective Order And Enlargement Of Time, asserting that the March 13, 2026 Order established a binding March 20 compliance deadline. GAL contends that recalculation of timelines following an amended hearing request does not alter or stay existing orders. She further argued that the District failed to demonstrate good cause for the enlargement. Moreover, the one-month extension is excessive, and the delay would prejudice GAL by postponing access to critical safety, placement, and hearing preparation information.
LEGAL STANDARDS AND APPLICATION OF LEGAL STANDARDS:
Legal Standards:
Motion to Amend
BSEA Hearing Rule I(G) allows the moving party to amend the Hearing Request under two circumstances:
"1. In response to a Hearing Officer's determination that a hearing request is insufficient, as described in E, above, the moving party may file an amended hearing request within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the Hearing Officer's determination.
2. If the other party consents in writing, or the Hearing Officer grants permission. (The Hearing Officer may not grant such permission later than five (5) calendar days before the start of the hearing.)
Whenever a hearing request is amended, the entire process starts over for the purpose of timelines, as if the amended hearing request were a new request. However, to the extent the amendment merely clarifies issues raised in the initial hearing request, the date of the initial hearing request shall be controlled for statute of limitations purposes. For issues not included in the original hearing request, the date of the amended hearing request shall be controlling for statute of limitations purposes."
Motion For Protective Order And Enlargement Of Time
Pursuant to the Hearing Rules for Special Education Appeals (hereinafter, BSEA Hearing Rules), Rule V(B), the party upon whom a discovery request is served shall respond within a period of thirty (30) calendar days unless a shorter or longer period of time is established by the Hearing Officer. BSEA Hearing Rule V(C) further provides that protective orders may be issued to protect a party from undue burden, expense, delay, or as otherwise deemed appropriate by the Hearing Officer.
Application of Legal Standards
a. Motion to Amend
GAL's Motion to Amend was filed more than five days prior to the scheduled hearing date, satisfying the timing requirement of BSEA Hearing Rule I(G). Springfield does not object to the amendment. Where the request is timely, unopposed, and raises substantive issues, an amendment is warranted. Accordingly, the Motion to Amend is allowed, and all timelines are recalculated pursuant to Rule I(G).
b. Motion for Protective Order and Enlargement of Time
Under BSEA Hearing Rules V(B) and V(C), the Hearing Officer may adjust discovery deadlines upon a showing of good cause. In light of the allowed amendment and resulting reset of timelines, Springfield's request to extend its deadline to respond to outstanding discovery is reasonable, but, in light of GAL's objection on the grounds that the enlargement would postpone her access to critical safety, placement, and hearing preparation information, I find that a shorter extension will allow Springfield to address both existing and newly raised claims without undue burden or prejudice to GAL.
ORDER:
For the reason set forth above, GAL's Motion to Amend is ALLOWED. All timelines will be recalculated, and an Amended Notice of Hearing will be issued to the parties. The Hearing is scheduled for an initial hearing date of 4/21/2026.
Springfield's Motion For Protective Order And Enlargement Of Time is also ALLOWED, in part. Springfield shall respond to the Subpoenas Duces Tecum and the Interrogatories by the close of business day on April 3, 2026.
So Ordered,
/s/ Alina Kantor Nir
Date: March 19, 2026
Footnotes
[1] The pleading was filed by GAL on Saturday, March 14, 2026, and, as such, is deemed to have been filed on March 16, 2026, the next business day.
[2] GAL requested the following relief: "1. Immediate review of [Student's] placement; 2. Identification and funding of an appropriate therapeutic placement; 3. Immediate door-to-door transportation; 4. Production of incident reports and communications related to [Student]; 5. A properly convened Team meeting addressing [Student's] services and grade placement; 6. Compensatory education for the period during which [Student] has been denied appropriate services."