California OAH special education order · June 9, 2017
Order Denying Request to File Amended Closing Brief
OAH Case No. 2017020873 · ALJ Penelope S. Pahl
OAH denied District's request to substitute a shortened closing brief and accepted its slightly over-length original, finding no prejudice to Student and that an amended brief would give District extra preparation time.
This case went to decision
Student v. Liberty Union High School District: Liberty Union High must add daily dyslexia instruction, fund 152 tutoring hours, and train staff; transition-meeting timing claim denied. (2017)
Summary
OAH set a 20-page limit on closing briefs. District filed a brief of just over 24 pages, then asked to substitute a 20-page amended version, explaining that counsel had misremembered the limit. Student did not oppose or object. The ALJ denied the request and accepted the original brief, reasoning that Student showed no prejudice from the extra pages and that allowing an amended brief would give District more time to prepare than Student had. The ALJ cautioned counsel to double-check page-limit orders.
Why it matters
OAH treats equal preparation time for closing briefs as more important than strict page limits, so a party may not get extra time to rework its brief after the deadline. Parties should confirm briefing limits before filing, because OAH may caution counsel who miss them.
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. 2017020873 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO FILE
AMENDED CLOSING BRIEF
LIBERTY UNION HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On May 18, 2017, at the close of the hearing in the above-captioned matter, the undersigned ordered a 20 page limit on the closing briefs to be filed on June 5, 2017. On June 5, 2017, District filed a closing brief slightly more than 24 pages. Student’s closing brief was exactly 20 pages. On June 7, 2017, Liberty filed a request seeking the opportunity to amend their closing brief by reducing it to 20 pages. They attached their proposed amended brief. A credible declaration from counsel stated the longer brief was originally filed based on a mis-recollection as to the briefing limit ordered. An immediate effort to correct the mistake was made by Liberty. No opposition to the motion to file an amended brief or objection to the length of district’s original brief was filed by Student.
In this situation, no prejudice has been demonstrated to Student by simply accepting the brief originally filed. Although a few more pages were submitted by District than the limit, allowing an amended closing brief would result in District being allowed more time to prepare their brief that Student was allowed. It is more equitable to allow both sides the same amount of time to prepare their closing arguments.
Counsel is cautioned to double-check page limit orders prior to preparing closing briefs.
DATE: June 9, 2017 /s/
PENELOPE S. PAHL
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings