California OAH special education order · May 18, 2016
Order Granting Motion to Consolidate
OAH Case No. 2016050647, 2016040286 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff
OAH granted District's motion to consolidate over Student's opposition because both cases involve the same parties, overlapping witnesses, and common questions about Student's 2015-2016 placement.
Summary
District filed its own due process complaint and asked OAH to consolidate it with Student's earlier-filed case. Student opposed the motion at a prehearing conference. OAH granted consolidation because the cases share identical parties, overlapping witnesses, and similar questions about Student's educational placement during the 2015-2016 school year. District's case was made the primary case, so the 45-day decision timeline runs from District's filing date, and the dates in Student's case were vacated.
Why it matters
When a district files its own complaint on the same placement dispute, OAH will usually combine the cases even over a parent's objection. Making the district's later-filed case the primary case can reset the hearing schedule and decision timeline.
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:
SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL OAH Case No. 2016050647
DISTRICT,
v.
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2016040286 v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE
SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On March 30, 2016, Parents on behalf of Student filed a Request for Due Process Hearing in Office of Administrative Hearing case number 2016040286 (Student’s Case), naming San Marcos UnifiedSchool District.
On May 16, 2016, District filed a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2016050647 (District’s Case), naming Student.
Also on May 16, 2016, District filed a Motion to Consolidate Student’s Case with District’s Case. Student opposed the motion during a prehearing conference held on May 16, 2016.
Request for Consolidation Although no statute or regulation specifically provides a standard to be applied in deciding a motion to consolidate special education cases, OAH will generallyconsolidate 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 economyb y saving time or preventing inconsistent rulings. (See Gov. Code, § 11507.3, subd. (a) [administrative proceedings maybe consolidated if they involve a common question of law or fact]; Code of Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a) [same applies to civil cases].)
Here, Student’s Case and District’s Case involve identical parties, overlapping witnesses, and a common question of law or fact. In particular, each case raises similar questions related to Student’s educational placement during the 2015-2016 school year.
Accordingly, consolidation is granted.
ORDER
1. District’s Motion to Consolidate is granted.
2. All dates previously set in OAH case number 2016040286 (Student’s
Case) are vacated.
3. District’s case is designated the primary case and the 45-day timeline for
issuance of the decision in the consolidated cases shall be based on the date of the filing for OAH case number 2016050647 (District’s Case).
4. The consolidated matter shall proceed pursuant to the dates in OAH’s May 17,
2016 scheduling order. Mediation shall be held on May 31, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. The telephonic prehearing conference shall be held on June 3, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. The due process hearing shall be held on June 9, 2016, unless otherwise ordered.
DATE: May 18, 2016
PAUL H. KAMOROFF
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings