California OAH special education order · March 26, 2013

Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint

OAH Case No. 2013030376 · ALJ Susan Ruff

OAH found Student's due process complaint sufficient, rejecting District's demand for more factual detail because the complaint clearly stated the issues and gave enough facts for District to respond.

Complaint found sufficient Sufficiency of complaint

Summary

District filed a notice of insufficiency arguing that Student's due process complaint needed more factual detail for each allegation. OAH disagreed and found the complaint sufficient under federal law. The issues were clearly stated, with enough related facts for District to respond and take part in a resolution session and mediation. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates were confirmed.

Why it matters

A complaint only has to give the district an understanding of the issues and the facts behind them. Districts cannot force parents to plead every factual detail, because the pleading rules are read liberally in favor of the student.

Key authority cited

  • 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
  • Ed. Code § 56502
  • Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
  • Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
  • 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699 (Aug. 14, 2006)

Topics

sufficiency notice of insufficiency pleading standards due process complaint

Full text of the order

Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.

BEFORE THE

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of:

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2013030376

v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF

SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS

COACHELLA VALLEY UNIFIED COMPLAINT

SCHOOL DISTRICT.

On March 11, 2013, Student’s parents on behalf of Student (Student) filed a due process hearing request 1 (complaint) naming the Coachella Valley Unified School District (District).

On March 26, 2013, the District filed a notice of insufficiency (NOI) as to Student’s complaint.

APPLICABLE LAW

The named parties to a due process hearing request have the right to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint. 2 The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of Title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).

A complaint is sufficient if it contains: (1) a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to the proposed initiation or change concerning the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the child; (2) facts relating to the problem; and (3) a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent known and available to the party at the time. 3 These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the 1 A request for a due process hearing under Education Code section 56502 is the due process complaint notice required under Title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).

2 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).

3 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).

named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. 4 The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” 5 The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. 6 Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. 7

DISCUSSION

The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient to put the District on notice of the issues forming the basis of the complaint. Student’s complaint identifies the issues and adequate related facts about the problem to permit the District to respond to the complaint and participate in a resolution session and mediation.

The District’s NOI argues that Student’s complaint should contain additional factual details regarding each allegation. However, that level of detail is not required. The issues are clearly stated and sufficiently detailed to meet the legal requirements.

ORDER

1. The complaint is sufficient under Title 20 United States Code section

1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).

4 See, H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.

5 Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.

6 Alexandra R. v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept. 10, 2009, No. 06-cv-0215- JL) 2009 WL 2957991 at p.3 [nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F. Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd.

(M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, No. 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 at p. 3[nonpub.

opn.] ; but cf. M.S.-G. v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. (3d Cir. 2009) 306 Fed.Appx.

772, at p. 3[nonpub. opn.].

7 Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities, 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699 (Aug. 14, 2006).

2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are

confirmed.

Dated: March 26, 2013 /s/

SUSAN RUFF

Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings