California OAH special education order · February 23, 2015

Order Denying Student's Request to Set Aside the Settlement Agreement and Set Dates for Hearing

OAH Case No. 2014100512, 2014090795 · ALJ Alexa J. Hohensee

OAH denied Parent's request to cancel a mediated settlement and set hearing dates, because OAH lacks jurisdiction to rescind a settlement agreement whose validity is disputed; that must go to court.

Denied Reopening cases and vacating settlements

Summary

After the parties reached a mediated settlement contingent on school board approval, Parent wrote directly to OAH asking it to "cancel and reverse" the agreement and set a hearing. Parent called the mediation a "sham" and said District gave false and misleading information. The letter did not come from Student's counsel and apparently was not served on District. OAH denied the request, explaining that its jurisdiction over settlements covers only claims that a breach of the agreement denied Student a FAPE, not whether an agreement can be rescinded, which must be pursued in court.

Why it matters

A family that regrets a mediated settlement cannot undo it at OAH, even if they believe the district misled them. Challenges to a settlement's validity belong in court, so parents should be sure of an agreement before signing.

Key authority cited

20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6)
Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a)
D.R. v. East Brunswick Bd. of Educ. (3d Cir. 1997) 109 F.3d 896
Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 223 F.3d 1026
Pedraza v. Alameda Unified Sch. Dist. (N.D.Cal. 2007) 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26541

Topics

settlement agreement rescission oah jurisdiction mediation consolidated case

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. 2014100512 (Primary)

ALHAMBRA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

ALHAMBRA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, OAH Case No. 2014090795 (Secondary)

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT. ORDER DENYING STUDENT’S

REQUEST TO SET ASIDE THE

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND SET

DATES FOR HEARING

On September 22, 2014, Alhambra Unified School District filed a due process hearing request, OAH case number 2014090795, naming Student. On October 10, 2014, Parent on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing request, OAH case number 2014100512, naming District. Both parties were represented by counsel. The cases were consolidated by order dated October 15, 2014.

On February 12, 2015, the parties provided proof to OAH that they had entered into a settlement agreement of these consolidated matters at mediation that was contingent on school board approval. Accordingly, all dates in these consolidated matters were vacated and a telephonic status conference was calendared for March 4, 2015, after the board meeting.

On February 17, 2015, Parent sent a letter to OAH requesting that OAH “cancel and reverse” the terms of the settlement agreement and set a due process hearing date. The letter did not come from Student’s counsel, and does not appear to have been served on District.

APPLICABLE LAW

Parents have the right to present a complaint “with respect to any matter relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to such child” under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) or California law. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6); Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a).)

When a settlement agreement is voluntarily and willingly entered into by the parties, it becomes a binding contract. (D.R. v. East Brunswick Bard of Education (3rd Cir. 1997)

109 F.3d 896, 898.)

OAH has jurisdiction to hear due process claims arising under the IDEA. (Wyner v.

Manhattan Beach Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 223 F.3d 1026, 1028-1029.) As to settlement agreements, OAH jurisdiction is limited to adjudicating claims alleging a denial of a student’s right to a free appropriate public education (FAPE) as a result of a violation of the agreement. (See Pedraza v. Alameda Unified Sch. Dist. (N.D.Cal. 2007) 2007 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 26541.

DISCUSSION AND ORDER

Here, the parties entered into a valid contract subject to the approval of the District’s board. Parent’s letter to OAH attaches an email from Parent to several District representatives and her attorney, dated February 16, 2015, characterizing the mediation as a “sham,” contending that the information provided by District was “false and misleading,”

and referencing several alleged pre-mediation incidents.

The issue presented by Parent’s request is not whether there was a violation of a settlement agreement that resulted in a denial of FAPE to Student, but whether or not the settlement agreement can be rescinded. The jurisdiction of OAH is very narrow, and does not include rescission of settlement agreements when a dispute arises as to the validity of the agreement. The proper forum for Student to set aside the settlement agreement is not OAH, but through the court system.

Student’s request to set aside the settlement agreement and set hearing dates is denied.