California OAH special education order · May 22, 2015
Order of Determination of Insufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2015050753 · ALJ Robert Helfand
OAH found Student's complaint insufficient because it described facts but never listed the specific issues, leaving Fullerton unable to tell what Student was claiming; Student may amend within 14 days.
Summary
Fullerton filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. OAH found that the complaint told a story but did not list the issues. Because of that, it was unclear whether Student was claiming a child find failure, a failure to implement the December 2014 or April 2015 IEPs, or only that the April IEP offered an inappropriate placement. OAH gave Student 14 days to file an amended complaint, warned that the case will be dismissed if no amendment is filed, and vacated all dates.
Why it matters
Even under the liberal pleading standard, a complaint that describes events but does not state the specific legal issues (for example, child find, failure to implement, or inappropriate placement) can be found insufficient. Parents should list each issue clearly so the district has notice of what is being claimed.
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. 2015050753 v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
INSUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
FULLERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT. COMPLAINT
On May 12, 2015 Parent on behalf of Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) naming the Fullerton School District.
On May 18, 2015, Fullerton filed a Notice of Insufficiency 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 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 requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the 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).
20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).
20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).
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 contains a fact situation but fails to list what issues are being alleged. The failure to list the specific issues prevents Fullerton from understanding what is actually being alleged by the Student. For instance, it is unclear whether Student is claiming that Fullerton failed in its child find obligation, failed to implement the Individualized Education Programs from either December 14, 2014, or April 23, 2015, or whether the sole issue is that the April 23, 2014 IEP fails to offer an appropriate placement.
Thus, Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled in that it fails to provide Fullerton 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 1415(c)(2)(D).
See, H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.
Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.
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.].
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).
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.
DATE: May 22, 2015
/S/
ROBERT HELFAND
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.