California OAH special education order · August 27, 2015
Order Granting Motion to Consolidate
OAH Case No. 2015060967, 2015080848 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH consolidated Student's and District's due process cases because both turn on whether District's July 2015 IEP offers Student a FAPE and will involve the same witnesses.
This case went to decision
Student v. San Diego Unified School District (consolidated): San Diego Unified is the responsible district for a student with autism who moved into its boundaries in June 2015. (2015)
Summary
District filed its own due process complaint against Student and moved to consolidate it with Student's earlier-filed case. Student did not respond. OAH granted the motion because both cases ask whether District's July 2015 IEP provides Student a free appropriate public education, and the same witnesses and issues will be involved. Student's case was named the primary case, so the 45-day decision timeline runs from the filing of Student's complaint, and the dates in District's case were vacated.
Why it matters
When a district files its own case defending the same IEP that a parent is challenging, OAH will usually combine the two cases. The parent's earlier case can become the primary case and control the hearing schedule.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11507.3, subd. (a)
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a)
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 Consolidated Matters of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2015060967 v.
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT,
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL OAH Case No. 2015080848
DISTRICT,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
v. CONSOLIDATE
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
On August 17, 2015, the Office of Administrative Hearings granted Student’s motion to file an amended Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2015060967 (Student’s Case), naming San Diego Unified School District.
On August 20, 2015, District filed a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2015080848 (District’s Case), naming Student.
On August 20, 2015, District filed a Motion to Consolidate Student’s Case with District’s Case. Student did not file a response to the motion.
Consolidation Although no statute or regulation specifically provides a standard to be applied in deciding a motion to consolidate special education cases, OAH will generally consolidate matters that involve: a common question of law and/or fact; the same parties; and when consolidation of the matters furthers the interests of judicial economy by saving time or preventing inconsistent rulings. (See Gov. Code, § 11507.3, subd. (a) [administrative proceedings may be consolidated if they involve a common question of law or fact]; Code of Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a) [same applies to civil cases].)
Here, the First Case and Second Case involve a common question of law or fact, specifically, whether District’s July 2015 individualized educational program provides Student with a free appropriate public education. Consolidation furthers the interests of judicial economy because both cases will involve the same witnesses and factual and legal issues. Accordingly, consolidation is granted.
ORDER
1. District’s Motion to Consolidate is granted.
2. The 45-day timeline for issuance of the decision in the consolidated cases shall be
based on the date of the filing of the complaint in OAH Case Number 2015060967 (Student’s Case), which is designated the primary case.
3. All dates previously set in OAH Case Number 2015080848 (District’s Case) are
vacated. Matter shall proceed as scheduled on dates in OAH Case Number 2015060967 (Student’s Case).
DATE: August 27, 2015
/S /
PETER PAUL CASTILLO
Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings