Decision  Rybicki v. MTRS, CR-26-0339

Date:	10/16/2026
Organization:	Division of Administrative Law Appeals
Docket Number:	CR-26-0339

• Petitioner: Laurie Rybicki
• Respondent: Massachusetts Teachers’ Retirement System
• Administrative Magistrate: Yakov Malkiel

Order of Dismissal

Petitioner Laurie Rybicki appeals from a decision of the Massachusetts Teachers’ Retirement System (MTRS) excluding the petitioner from the benefits program known as Retirement Plus. See G.L. c. 32, § 5(4).  MTRS has filed a motion to dismiss, which the petitioner has not opposed, despite being advised that failure to file an opposition would be construed as indicating the petitioner’s agreement with MTRS’s position.  Compare Bray & Gillespie Mgmt. LLC v. Lexington Ins. Co., 527 F. Supp. 2d 1355, 1371 (M.D. Fla. 2007), with Jones v. Providence Pub. Sch., No. 23-1407, 2024 WL 1128034 (1st Cir. Mar. 11, 2024). Dismissal is therefore appropriate based on a combination of failure to prosecute, mootness, and the petitioner’s consent.

The motion also appears to be meritorious for essentially the reasons stated there.  The petitioner failed to enroll in Retirement Plus during her statutory enrollment window, which was open during the first half of 2021.  See St. 2000, c. 114, § 2.  It is not plausible that the petitioner enrolled, as she says, upon being hired in 2000.  See id.  It makes no legal difference in cases of this type whether the result may be unfortunate.  See O’Malley v. Contributory Ret. Appeal Bd., 104 Mass. App. Ct. 778, 782 (2024).

In view of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is ALLOWED and this appeal is DISMISSED.

/s/ Yakov Malkiel

Yakov Malkiel
Administrative Magistrate
Division of Administrative Law Appeals