California OAH special education order · August 8, 2013
Order of Determination of Insufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2013070989 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff
OAH found Student's complaint insufficient because it gave only a general narrative of the 2012-2013 school year without stating any specific issues, and allowed Student 14 days to amend.
Summary
The District filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. OAH agreed. The complaint described events from the 2012-2013 school year that hinted at possible claims about bus safety, records requests, parent participation at a triennial IEP meeting, related services, and placement, but it never actually stated any issues. Student, who had a lawyer, was given 14 days to file an amended complaint that lists each issue separately with its supporting facts, or the case would be dismissed.
Why it matters
A story of what went wrong is not enough. Each claim must be stated as a separate, specific issue with its own facts, especially when a lawyer drafts the complaint, or the District can stall the case with a sufficiency challenge.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(D)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- 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
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. 2013070989
v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
INSUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL COMPLAINT
DISTRICT.
On July 22, 2013, Parent on behalf of Student (Student), through counsel, filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) naming the San Francisco Unified School District (District).
On August 6, 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 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).
requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the 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
Student’s complaint alleges several claims in the complaint, which are all insufficiently pled as discussed below.
Student provides a general narrative of events which impacted Student’s educational program during the 2012-2013 school year. However, Student’s complaint does not provide any specific issues. Student introduces facts which may constitute claims relating to Student’s safety while on the school bus, records requests, parent participation at a triennial Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting, unspecified related services, and school placement. Nonetheless, Student’s presentation of facts provides only allusions to possible claims while failing to state the claims. Student’s assertions are vague and it is unclear what issues form the basis of Student’s complaint. The complaint does not provide the District enough information, or any specific issues, to enable the District to participate in the resolution session and mediation. Student, who is represented by counsel, should delineate 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).
each issue, separately and in a concise manner, with a description of facts which relate to each specific issue.
Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled in that it fails to provide the District with the required notice of a description of the problem and the facts relating to the problem.
ORDER
1. Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled under section Title 20 United States
Code section 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under Title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II). 8
3. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of Title 20 United
States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the complaint will be
dismissed.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
Dated: August 08, 2013 /s/
PAUL H. KAMOROFF
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings 8 The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.