California OAH special education order · April 7, 2014
Order Denying Request for Continuance
OAH Case No. 2014020930 · ALJ Bob N. Varma
OAH denied Paso's contested request to continue the hearing over spring break, finding the IDEA does not pause due process hearings for school vacations and Paso did not prove witnesses' trips were booked before filing.
This case went to decision
Student v. Paso Robles Joint Unified School District: Paso Robles Joint Unified did not have to provide occupational therapy during a first grader's 2014 extended school year. (2014)
Summary
Paso asked to continue the due process hearing because the district would be closed for spring vacation on the scheduled date and several witnesses had prepaid vacations. Student opposed, and both sides filed further replies. OAH denied the request. It found that Paso had known of the conflict since it received the scheduling notice and gave no proof that the witnesses bought their trips before the case was filed on February 25, 2014. It also held that the IDEA does not suspend due process hearings during school vacations, because its speedy-resolution mandate could not be met if it did. OAH warned both sides that personal accusations in their filings were unhelpful and urged a more professional tone.
Why it matters
A district cannot delay a hearing just because school is on break. Witness unavailability must be backed by proof that it was truly unavoidable, such as trips booked before the case was filed. Parents should still subpoena any witnesses the district does not control.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a), (c)
- Ed. Code § 56502, subd. (f)
- Ed. Code § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c)
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d)
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. 2014020930
v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
CONTINUANCE
PASO ROBLES JOINT UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT.
On April 1, 2014, the Paso Robles Joint Unified School District (Paso) filed a request to continue the hearing in this matter on the grounds that Paso is closed for spring vacation on the currently calendared hearing date. Student opposed Paso’s request; Paso filed a reply to Student’s opposition; and, Student filed a reply to Paso’s reply. As discussed below, the request is denied. 1 A due process hearing must be conducted and a decision rendered within 45 days of receipt of the due process notice unless an extension is granted for good cause. (34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a) & (c) (2006); Ed. Code, §§ 56502, subd. (f), 56505, subd. (f)(3); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020.) As a result, continuances are disfavored. Good cause may include the unavailability of a party, counsel, or an essential witness due to death, illness or other excusable circumstances; substitution of an attorney when the substitution is required in the interests of justice; a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or another significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for hearing. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).) The Office of Administrative Hearings considers all relevant facts and circumstances, including the proximity of the hearing date; previous continuances or delays;
the length of continuance requested; the availability of other means to address the problem giving rise to the request; prejudice to a party or witness as a result of a continuance; the impact of granting a continuance on other pending hearings; whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; whether the parties have stipulated to a continuance; whether the interests of The pleadings by both parties contain extraneous facts, allegations and accusations that are directed personally at the representatives and parties, and based primarily upon hearsay. Such statements and accusations are not helpful to the determination of whether good cause has been established for a continuance. They only lead to lengthy pleadings that waste the financial resources of the parties. The parties’ representatives are encouraged to adopt a more professional tone towards one another.
justice are served by the continuance; and any other relevant fact or circumstance. (See Cal.
Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d).)
OAH has reviewed the request for good cause and considered all relevant facts and circumstances. The request is:
Denied. This matter was filed on February 25, 2014, and Paso has been aware of its potential conflict since it was served with the scheduling notice. Paso contends that several witnesses are unavailable for hearing due to prepaid vacations. However, Paso’s request, and reply to Student’s opposition, fails to provide proof that the witnesses who are unavailable purchased their trips prior to February 25, 2014. Paso further contends that due to spring vacation its facilities are closed and staff unavailable. However, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is silent on whether due process hearings are suspended during school vacations. In fact the IDEA’s speedy resolution mandate could not be met if due process hearings were suspended during school vacation days. All prehearing conference and hearing dates are confirmed and shall proceed as calendared. 2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: April 7, 2014 /s/
BOB N. VARMA
Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings It appears that while some potential witnesses may be out of the state, not all are unavailable. While OAH requires a school district to produce witnesses under its control, it remains Student’s responsibility to properly subpoena witnesses that are not under Paso’s control on a particular hearing date.