California OAH special education order · April 12, 2017
Order Granting Motion to Consolidate
OAH Case No. 2017030696, 2017031348 · ALJ Kara Hatfield
OAH granted a joint motion to consolidate Student's and District's cases because both turn on how severe Student's behavior is and whether it required different services or reassessment.
This case went to decision
Student v. Irvine Unified School District (consolidated): Irvine Unified must repay $5,803 in private school costs and fund 120 compensatory hours after cutting a student's full-time aide to one hour a day. (2017)
Summary
Student's case claimed District had no IEP in place before the 2016-2017 school year and failed to offer a full-time one-to-one behavior aide. Student sought reimbursement for private school and behavioral services. District's case sought permission to assess Student's behavior under a November 2016 assessment plan that Parents refused to sign. The parties jointly asked to consolidate the cases, and OAH granted the request. Although the cases could likely be decided separately, OAH found they share a common topic: the severity of Student's behavior and whether it called for different services or reassessment. The consolidated case will follow Student's case timeline and hearing dates.
Why it matters
OAH may combine a parent's services claim with a district's request to assess without consent when both depend on the same facts about the child's needs, and a joint request makes this much easier. Parents should know the district's assessment request will then be heard together with their own claims.
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. 2017030696 v.
IRVINE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
IRVINE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, OAH Case No. 2017031348 v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
On March 13, 2017, Student filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2017030696 (Student’s Case), naming Irvine Unified School District.
On March 23, 2017, District filed a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2017031348 (District’s Case), naming Student.
On April 6, 2017, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Consolidate Student’s Case with District’s Case.
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, Student’s Case and District’s Case do not obviously involve a common question of law or fact. Specifically, Student’s Case alleges District denied Parents meaningful participation in the educational decision-making process and deprived Student of educational benefit by failing to have in place an individualized educational program for Student prior to the start of the 2016-2017 school year, and denied Student a free appropriate public education by failing, in some unspecified IEP, to offer Student appropriate behavioral services and support, namely a full time one-to-one behavior aide with supervision and consultation services. As remedies, Student requests reimbursement for private school placement and behavioral services, and prospective funding for intensive behavioral services.
District’s Case alleges that assessment of Student’s behavior is warranted due to the disagreement about the severity of Student’s behavioral needs and requests that OAH authorize District to assess Student pursuant to the November 15, 2016 assessment plan, which Parents refused to sign. District’s Case further seeks a declaration that if Parents do not cooperate with any assessments OAH authorizes, District would be relieved of its obligation to provide Student a FAPE. Student’s Case, concerning problems in the past, and District’s Case, regarding whether District may assess Student without parental consent and what would happen in the future should Parents continue to not allow assessment, appear to be capable of resolution independently, without a risk of inconsistent rulings. However, a common topic of both cases is the severity of Student’s behavior, whether it necessitated different services than District offered, and whether it warranted reassessment of Student.
The parties jointly request consolidation of the cases, and that the consolidated case proceed on the dates currently scheduled in Student’s Case. Accordingly, consolidation is granted.
ORDER
1. The parties’ Joint Motion to Consolidate is granted.
2. All dates previously set in OAH Case Number 2017031348 [District’s Case] are
vacated.
3. 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 2017030696 [Student’s Case], and shall proceed on the dates in Student’s Case.
DATE: April 12, 2017
KARA HATFIELD
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings