California OAH special education order · December 12, 2016
Order of Determination of Insufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2016100991 · ALJ Judith Pasewark
OAH found Student's amended complaint insufficient as to Lassen County Office of Education because the complaint named it in the caption but alleged no facts about it.
Summary
Lassen County Office of Education filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's amended due process complaint. The complaint listed the County Office in the caption, but the body identified Lassen County School District and Long Valley Charter School as the district of residence and the 'District.' It contained no factual allegations naming or about the County Office. OAH found the complaint insufficient as to the County Office and gave Student 14 days to amend. If Student does not amend, the hearing will proceed only against Lassen County School District and Long Valley Charter School.
Why it matters
Naming an agency in the caption is not enough. The body of the complaint must describe the problem and the facts as they relate to each named agency, or that agency can get out of the case through a sufficiency challenge.
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
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
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. 2016100991 v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
INSUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
LASSEN COUNTY OFFICE OF COMPLAINT
EDUCATION AND LONG VALLEY
CHARTER SCHOOL
On November 16, 2016 the Office of Administrative Hearings granted Student’s request to file an amended Due Process Hearing Request1 (amended complaint) naming Lassen County Office of Education and Long Valley Charter School. On December 1, 2016, Lassen County Office of Education 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. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) 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. (20 U.S.C.
§ 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. (See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.)
1 A request for a due process hearing under Education Code section 56502 is the due process complaint notice required under title 20 U.S.C. section 1415(b)(7)(A).
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.) 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. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept. 10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Bd. 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, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. of Educ. (3d Cir. 2009) 306 Fed.Appx.
772, 775 [nonpub. opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
Student’s amended complaint, in its entirety, is insufficiently pled as discussed below.
Student’s amended complaint captions Lassen County Office of Education as a party, along with Long Valley Charter School. Student’s amended complaint however identifies Lassen County School District and Long Valley Charter School as Student’s district of residence, and as respondent “District” throughout the amended complaint. The body of the amended complaint contains no factual allegations directly pertaining to or naming Lassen County Office of Education.
Student’s complaint, in its entirety, is insufficiently pled in that it fails to provide Lassen County Office of Education with the required notice of a description of the problem and the facts relating to the problem as they relate to Lassen County Office of Education.
ORDER
1. Student’s amended complaint, in its entirety, is insufficiently pled as to Lassen
County Office of Education, under section title 20 United States Code 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).2
3. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20 U.S.C.
section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
2 The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.
5. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the hearing shall proceed
only against Lassen County School District and Long Valley Charter School.
DATE: December 12, 2016
JUDITH PASEWARK
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings