California OAH special education order · February 22, 2017

Order Denying San Diego County Office of Education's Motion to Dismiss

OAH Case No. 2017020361 · ALJ Tara Doss

OAH denied the San Diego County Office of Education's motion to dismiss itself from the case, because whether it is a proper party is a factual question that must be decided after a hearing.

Denied Motions to dismiss

This case went to decision

Student v. San Diego Unified School District et al.: San Diego Unified's $900 speech IEE cost cap was too low; district must fund a $1,500 IEE, but County prevails. (2017)

Summary

Student filed a due process complaint naming San Diego Unified School District, the San Diego SELPA, and the San Diego County Office of Education (SDCOE). SDCOE moved to be dismissed, saying it was an improper party that had never been responsible for providing Student a free appropriate public education. Student opposed the motion. OAH denied it because SDCOE's argument raised a factual dispute that cannot be decided without first letting Student build a record at hearing, and SDCOE did not claim the complaint was outside OAH's jurisdiction on its face or that it legally could not be responsible for Student's services.

Why it matters

An agency cannot get itself dropped from a case early just by saying it was not responsible for the student. If responsibility is a disputed fact, parents generally get to prove it at hearing. County offices of education are among the public agencies that can be named in a due process complaint.

Key authority cited

  • Ed. Code § 56501, subd. (a)
  • Ed. Code § 56500
  • Ed. Code § 56028.5
  • Gov. Code § 11425.10, subd. (a)(1)
  • Gov. Code § 11511.5, subd. (b)(12)
  • Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1030, subd. (e)(3)

Topics

motion to dismiss proper party county office of education selpa factual dispute

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. 2017020361 v. ORDER DENYING SAN DIEGO

COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION’S

SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL MOTION TO DISMISS

DISTRICT, SAN DIEGO SELPA, AND

SAN DIEGO COUNTY OFFICE OF

EDUCATION.

On February 7, 2017, Student filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a Request for Due Process Hearing (complaint), naming San Diego Unified School District, San Diego Special Education Local Plan Area, and San Diego County Office of Education.

On February 14, 2017, SDCOE filed with OAH a Motion to Dismiss itself as a party to the case, on the grounds that it is an improper party and has never been a local educational agency responsible for providing Student with a free appropriate public education. On February 17, 2017, Student filed an opposition to the motion.

APPLICABLE LAW AND DISCUSSION

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and its state law counterparts do not set forth a procedure for dismissing IDEA-related claims on the merits without first affording the petitioning party a chance to develop a record at hearing. (20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.) The Administrative Procedures Act requires that parties appearing before OAH receive notice and an opportunity to be heard, including the opportunity to present and rebut evidence.

(Gov. Code § 11425.10, subd. (a)(1).) However, at a prehearing conference, an administrative law judge may address such matters, “as shall promote the orderly and prompt conduct of the hearing.” (Gov. Code, § 11511.5, subd. (b)(12). Similarly, at hearing an ALJ may take action “to promote due process or the orderly conduct of the hearing.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1 § 1030, subd. (e)(3).)

Accordingly, OAH may dismiss a matter in its entirety, or in part, where it is evident from the face of the complaint that the alleged issues fall outside OAH jurisdiction or the pleaded facts cannot sustain a claim. Such circumstances may include, among other things, complaints that assert civil rights claims, claims seeking enforcement of a settlement agreement, or claims against an entity that legally, cannot be responsible for providing special education and related services under the facts alleged.

Special education due process hearing procedures extend to the parent or guardian, to the student in certain circumstances, and to “the public agency involved in any decisions regarding a pupil.” (Ed. Code § 56501, subd. (a).) A “public agency” may be “a school district, county office of education, special education local plan area …or any other public agency…providing special education or related services to individuals with exceptional needs.” (Ed. Code §§ 56500 and 56028.5.)

Here, SDCOE’s contention that it is an improper party is an issue of fact that OAH does not have authority to determine without first allowing Student the opportunity to develop a factual record at hearing. Moreover, SDCOE is not alleging the complaint, on its face, is outside OAH jurisdiction or that it cannot legally be responsible for providing special education and related services under the facts alleged.

ORDER

SDCOE’s Motion to Dismiss is denied. The matter shall proceed as scheduled.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: February 22, 2017

TARA DOSS

Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings