The City of Boston, Boston Legacy FC ownership, and the Emerald Necklace Conservancy were back in court Wednesday for the latest White Stadium lawsuit hearing.

Over a year after a Superior Court judge ruled in favor of the stadium renovation, the parties reconvened in front of the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC). The state’s highest appellate court heard oral arguments after the plaintiffs appealed last year’s ruling.

Here’s a breakdown of everything you need to know about the suit.

Background

Boston Unity Soccer Partners (BUSP) and the City of Boston partnered to renovate White Stadium, located in Franklin Park. The updated venue will be the home of Boston Public Schools (BPS) Athletics and the Legacy’s home stadium starting in 2027. 

The 10,000-seat venue opened in the late 1940s and was used to host a multitude of events, including concerts, games, cultural celebrations, and other community gatherings. The facility fell into disrepair and sustained damage from a fire in the 1990s. Many parts of the stadium were not usable and did not meet league standards for athletics events before construction began earlier this year.

The project will turn the venue into a state-of-the-art facility and will add new locker rooms, sports medicine offices, and strength and conditioning spaces, among other features. The stadium will also be outfitted with a grass field and new track.

City officials have said a renovation and upkeep would not be possible if the city had to bear the cost by itself. BUSP signed a 10-year lease (with two options to extend an additional 10 years) for the stadium and will cover maintenance costs.

Lawsuit Parties 

Plaintiffs: Emerald Necklace Conservancy (ENC) and 22 park advocates and Boston residents (aka Franklin Park Defenders)

Defendants: The City of Boston and BUSP

Historical Timeline 

Select a Year

Click on any year above to view the historical details regarding Franklin Park and the White Fund.

General Lawsuit Timeline

General Lawsuit Timeline

Timeline Overview

Select a date above to view the legal developments regarding the White Stadium renovation and the ongoing lawsuit.

  • February 2024: Emerald Necklace Conservancy and Franklin Park Defenders sue the city and BUSP and seek an injunction to block the stadium’s demolition. 
  • March 2024: Superior Court judge denies injunction, allowing renovation project to continue.
  • December 2024: City of Boston and BUSP sign lease for White Stadium.
  • March 2025: Three-day trial. 
  • April 2025: Judge rules in favor of renovation. Plaintiffs appeal decision. 
  • April 2026: Supreme Judicial Court hears oral arguments for case.

Trial

When the plaintiffs first filed their suit in 2024, they had two main arguments:

  • White Stadium is considered parkland. The renovation project violates Article 97 of the state constitution, which would require a two-thirds legislative vote to approve the land’s change of use to a stadium.
  • The public-private partnership between the City and BUSP violates the White Fund Trust’s terms.

Before the March 2025 trial began, Superior Court Justice Matthew Nestor threw out half the plaintiffs’ case, saying they had no legal standing to argue the breach of the trust. 

During the trial, the plaintiffs argued that the Article 97 violation would be twofold. Not only would the renovation constitute a change in use for that specific parcel, but the soccer team’s use and construction of park roads outside of the stadium parcel would also qualify as a change in use for Franklin Park as a whole, they said. The plaintiffs also asserted that the stadium lease would transfer possession to BUSP, which would require legislative approval.

The defendants maintained that the stadium is legally a school building, not a public park, as established by a 1950 statute. They also rebutted the privatization claim, saying the White Fund will retain ownership of the stadium. 

The 2025 Verdict

Nestor ruled in favor of the defendants and stadium renovation. He concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to prove the City expressed a deliberate attempt to designate the stadium parcel as a public park, and is therefore not subject to Article 97. The judge pointed to the Acts of 1947 and 1950, which he says would have voided any previous parkland dedication.

The Appeal

The plaintiffs appealed the decision, claiming the Trial Court erred by ruling that White Stadium is not protected parkland. The stadium parcel has been used as a public park since the city first took the land in 1883 for park purposes, according to the plaintiffs. 

They also claimed the court wrongfully dismissed parts of their case and failed to address some of their arguments. 

SJC Oral Arguments

One of the main questions from the seven judges on Wednesday was how to interpret certain statutes in order to assess whether White Stadium is protected land. 

Alan Lipkind, the plaintiffs’ attorney, maintained that even after White Stadium was built in Franklin Park, it has always been considered and used as public park land. When a judge referenced a 1950 statute that designated the stadium as a school building and yard, Lipkind said it was only deemed as such “for the purposes of fundraising,” since tax money could be used for school building repairs and alterations by that point in time. 

Attorney Sammy Nabulsi, representing the City of Boston, said the Act of 1950 was enough to extinguish any prior public park dedication and that the statute’s existence is proof that the legislature authorized a change of use.

Nabulsi was also questioned about how the team’s use of park roadways would affect Franklin Park and whether the construction of a food service and retail building on the parcel was consistent with the parcel’s current use.

After the oral arguments, Plaintiff Louis Elisa spoke to reporters and said they are in favor of the stadium’s renovation as long as a private entity is not involved.

“The outcome we’re looking for is that the stadium doesn’t go into private hands, and that students have use of the whole stadium,” he said. “We do not want to see public land and public stadiums turn over to private developers that minimize the use.”

White Stadium has already been partly demolished and construction is ongoing. The city is responsible for building the east side of the stadium, which will cost $135 million. BUSP’s responsibility for the west side will cost the group $190 million. 

Anshi Moreno, a senior policy advisor for the mayor, said the city would find a way to move forward if the SJC decided against the project.

“We are committed to giving back to BPS students, and so we'll figure out a plan to make sure that we're renovating,” she said. “We're going to remain hopeful, but we're always going to make sure that our students are well served.”

If BUSP is taken out of the equation before the stadium is complete, the lease requires the group to either finish their portion of construction or pay the City $45 million. 

Boston Legacy FC did not immediately reply to questions about the team’s contingency plan.

The case should be decided within 130 days of the hearing.