California OAH special education order · September 6, 2013

Order Denying Challenge for Cause

OAH Case No. 2013080296, 2013050805 · ALJ Charles Marson

OAH denied Student's challenge for cause against ALJ Charles Marson because disagreement with how the prehearing conference order framed a hearing issue is a ruling, not proof of bias.

Denied Disqualifying a judge for cause

This case went to decision

Student v. Manteca Unified School District (consolidated): Manteca Unified wins all issues and may place student at Children's Home of Stockton without parent consent. (2013)

Summary

After the prehearing conference order defined the issues for hearing, Student filed a challenge to disqualify the ALJ, and the District opposed it. Presiding Judge Bob Varma denied the challenge to the extent it was a peremptory challenge and referred the for-cause portion to ALJ Charles Marson. The ALJ denied the for-cause challenge because it rested only on Student's dissatisfaction with how one issue was described, which was a ruling made after substantial discussion with the parties. A party's disagreement with an ALJ's prior ruling is not grounds for disqualification, which requires a factual showing of actual bias. All dates stayed on calendar.

Why it matters

Disqualifying an ALJ for cause requires a factual showing of actual bias, prejudice, or interest. Disagreeing with how the ALJ framed the issues is not enough, so concerns about issue wording should be raised at the prehearing conference or through a proper motion instead.

Key authority cited

  • Gov. Code, § 11425.40
  • American Isuzu Motors, Inc. v. New Motor Vehicle Board (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 464
  • Haas v. County of San Bernardino (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1017
  • Clark v. City of Hermosa Beach (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1152

People named in the order

  • Bob Varma, Presiding Administrative Law Judge
  • Charles Marson, Administrative Law Judge

Topics

disqualification challenge for cause alj bias prehearing conference issue framing

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 Consolidated Matters of:

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2013080296

v.

MANTECA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

MANTECA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, OAH CASE NO. 2013050805

v.

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT. ORDER DENYING CHALLENGE FOR

CAUSE

On August 30, 2013, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) conducted a prehearing conference (PHC) in this matter and, on September 3, 2013 filed an Order Following Prehearing Conference. Among other things, that order defined the issues to be addressed in the upcoming due process hearing. On September 4, 2013, Student filed a challenge seeking to disqualify the undersigned from hearing this case. Also on September 4, 2013, the Manteca Unified School District filed an opposition to the challenge.

Student’s challenge has aspects of both a peremptory challenge and a challenge for cause. On September 4, 2013, Presiding Judge Bob Varma denied the challenge insofar as it was a peremptory challenge, and referred the challenge for cause to the undersigned.

APPLICABLE LAW

An ALJ may be disqualified for bias, prejudice, or interest in the proceeding. (Gov.

Code, § 11425.40, subd. (a).) The following, without further evidence of bias, prejudice, or interest, are not by themselves grounds for disqualification: 1) the ALJ is or is not a member of a racial, ethnic, religious, sexual, or similar group and the proceeding involves the rights of that group; 2) the ALJ has experience, technical competence, or specialized knowledge of, or has in any capacity expressed a view on, a legal, factual, or policy issue presented in the proceeding; or 3) the ALJ has as a lawyer or public official participated in the drafting of laws or regulations or in the effort to pass or defeat laws or regulations, the meaning, effect, or application of which is in issue in the proceeding. (Gov. Code, § 11425.40, subd. (b).)

In other words, to disqualify an ALJ for cause, a factual showing of actual bias or prejudice is required. (See American Isuzu Motors, Inc. v. New Motor Vehicle Board (1986)

186 Cal.App.3d 464, 472.) For example, in order to be a basis for disqualification, the financial interest of the ALJ in the outcome of the case must be direct, personal, and substantial, rather than slight. (Haas v. County of San Bernardino (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1017, 1031.) Similarly, personal involvement in the case by the ALJ or familial connections may warrant disqualification based solely on the probability of bias. (See Clark v. City of Hermosa Beach (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1152, 1170-1173.) However, in most other cases, including claims of bias arising from the hearing officer’s personal or political views, disqualification will not occur absent a showing of actual bias. (Haas, supra, at p. 1032.)

Student’s challenge is based on his dissatisfaction with the way one of the issues to be heard is described in the Order Following Prehearing Conference filed on September 3,

2013. That description was written after substantial discussion at the PHC among the parties

and the ALJ, and constitutes a ruling on the nature of the issue to be heard. A party’s dissatisfaction with a previous ruling of an ALJ is not ground for a disqualification for cause.

ORDER

1. Student's challenge for cause of ALJ Charles Marson is denied.

2. All dates previously set in this matter will remain on calendar.

Dated: September 6, 2013 /s/

CHARLES MARSON

Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings