California OAH special education order · January 9, 2015

Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint

OAH Case No. 2014090268, 2014090535 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff

OAH granted Student and Newport-Mesa's joint motion to amend Student's complaint over Huntington Beach's objection. Huntington Beach showed no prejudice from delay, and judicial economy favored the amendment.

Granted Amending the complaint

This case went to decision

Student v. Huntington Beach Union High School District (consolidated): Huntington Beach Union High must reimburse up to $30,690 for private school and therapy after child find and counseling failures. (2015)

Summary

Student and Newport-Mesa jointly asked to amend Student's due process complaint to add new issues. Huntington Beach opposed, arguing the amendment would push back the hearing dates and add new issues against both districts. OAH granted the motion. It found that adding or revising issues is allowed, that Huntington Beach did not explain how a delay would harm it, and that the new issues involved the same parties and similar witnesses. The amended complaint was deemed filed on the date of the order, and all timelines were reset.

Why it matters

A district's objection that an amendment will delay the hearing will not block it unless the district shows real prejudice. Parents can usually add issues before hearing, especially when the issues involve the same parties and witnesses, but every amendment resets the hearing timelines.

Key authority cited

20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)
20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(ii)

Topics

amended complaint timelines reset judicial economy prejudice consolidated case

Order details

OAH case number: 2014090268, 2014090535
Order date: January 9, 2015
Order type: Amending the complaint
Ruling: Granted
Administrative law judge: Paul H. Kamoroff
Moving party: Student and Newport-Mesa Unified School District (joint motion)
Case filed by: Student and District (consolidated)
Education agency: Huntington Beach Union High School District; Newport-Mesa Unified School District
Student's counsel: Not stated
District's counsel: Not stated
Official order: OAH PDF

Orders in this case

September 22, 2014: Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Student's Issue "A"; Order Sua Sponte Dismissing Student's Issue "B
September 22, 2014: Joint motion to consolidate granted; mediation October 8, hearing October 28, 2014. (PDF)
January 9, 2015: Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint
January 29, 2015: Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Student's Issue "A"
February 12, 2015: Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Student's Issue Number Two
February 26, 2015: Order Denying Student's Request for Continuance
February 27, 2015: Order Granting Peremptory Challenge and Continuing the Prehearing Conference
March 3, 2015: Order Following Prehearing Conference
March 16, 2015: Newport-Mesa USD dismissed as a party at Student's request; case continues against Huntington Beach UHSD. (PDF)
May 18, 2015: Order Following Prehearing Conference
August 11, 2015: Order Overruling Objection/Denying Motion to Strike Student's Written Closing Argument, but Admonish
Decision (2015-08-03)

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:

PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2014090268 v.

HUNTINGTON BEACH UNION HIGH

SCHOOL DISTRICT AND NEWPORT-

MESA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

HUNTINGTON BEACH UNION HIGH OAH Case No. 2014090535

SCHOOL DISTRICT,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. AMEND COMPLAINT

PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.

On September 3, 2014, Parents on behalf of Student filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2014090268 (First Case), naming Huntington Beach Union High School District and Newport-Mesa Unified School District. On September 11, 2014, Huntington Beach filed a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2014090535 (Second Case), naming Student. On September 22, 2014, OAH granted the parties joint request to consolidate the First Case with the Second Case.

On January 6, 2015, Student and Newport-Mesa filed a joint Motion to Amend Student’s Due Process Hearing Request (amended complaint). On January 8, 2015, Huntington Beach submitted an opposition.

An amended complaint may be filed when either (a) the other party consents in writing and is given the opportunity to resolve the complaint through a resolution session, or (b) the hearing officer grants permission, provided the hearing officer may grant such permission at any time more than five (5) days prior to the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C.

§1415(c)(2)(E)(i).) 1 The filing of an amended complaint restarts the applicable timelines for the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C. §1415(c)(2)(E)(ii).)

1 All statutory citations are to title 20 United States Code unless otherwise indicated.

Huntington Beach primarily objects to the amended complaint because (1) it will extend the hearing dates for due process, and (2) adds new issues against Newport-Mesa and Huntington Beach. However, it is permissible for a party to add or revise issues in an amended complaint. Additionally, Huntington Beach fails to explain how it would be prejudiced by an extension of the hearing dates.

Here, Student seeks to add new issues in the amended complaint which include identical parties and similar witnesses to the original complaint. Judicial economy therefore favors granting the motion to amend. Finally, the motion to amend was filed more than 13 days prior to the hearing and is therefore timely.

For the foregoing reasons, Student and Newport-Mesa’s joint motion to amend is granted. The amended complaint shall be deemed filed on the date of this order. All applicable timelines shall be reset as of the date of this order. OAH will issue a scheduling order with the new dates.