California OAH special education order · August 14, 2017
Order Following Prehearing Conference; Denying Motion to Continue the Due Process Hearing
OAH Case No. 2017030926 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH denied District's eve-of-hearing continuance request because the conflicting hearing had settled and District knew of staff training and witness availability when it agreed to the current dates.
This case went to decision
Student v. Vista Unified School District: Vista Unified must fund psychoeducational and speech-language IEEs and train staff after a deficient triennial reevaluation. (2017)
Summary
After a prehearing conference, OAH set a single issue for the August 22, 2017 hearing: whether District denied Student a FAPE by failing to conduct a psychoeducational assessment of Student's academics and attention deficits. District moved to continue the hearing, citing a conflicting hearing, too little time to prepare witnesses, and staff development training. Student opposed. OAH denied the motion because the conflicting case had settled, and District had jointly proposed the current dates knowing its staff would be in training and unavailable, yet waited until the eve of hearing to ask for a delay.
Why it matters
A district that agrees to hearing dates cannot later claim good cause for a continuance based on staff scheduling it knew about when it agreed. Parents can successfully oppose last-minute delay requests on that basis.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515
- Ed. Code § 56502, subd. (f)
- Ed. Code § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332
- Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49
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. 2017030926 v. ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING
CONFERENCE; DENYING MOTION
VISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. TO CONTINUE THE DUE PROCESS
HEARING
On August 14, 2017, a telephonic prehearing conference was held before Administrative Law Judge Rommel Cruz, Office of Administrative Hearings. Ashok Pathi, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Student. Sarah Sutherland, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Vista Unified School District. The PHC was recorded.
Based upon discussion with the parties, the ALJ issues the following order:
1. Hearing Dates, Times, and Location. The hearing shall take place on
August 22, 23, and 24, 2017, and continuing day to day, Monday through Thursday, at the discretion of the ALJ. The hearing shall take place at the District’s offices located at 1234 Arcadia Avenue, Vista, CA 92084. The hearing shall begin at 9:30 a.m. the first day of the hearing and at 9:00 a.m. all other days, unless otherwise ordered.
As ordered in the scheduling order, the named local educational agency was to provide a facility for the hearing that fully complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq.), the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51 et seq.), and all laws governing accessibility of government facilities to persons with disabilities. The named local educational agency failed to certify that it would provide a facility for this case that complied with the law. The local educational agency shall inform OAH within two days of the date of this order it is able to certify that it will provide a facility that complies with the law.
Prior to the beginning of the hearing, District shall assist the ALJ to ensure that the hearing room is configured into a courtroom setting, including (1) a table for Student and his representatives; (2) a table for District’s legal representative and special education representative; (3) a table for the witness; and (4) a table for the ALJ, near an electrical outlet. District shall also make reasonable effort to ensure that drinking water and tissue are available to all parties, witnesses and the ALJ.
The parties shall immediately notify all potential witnesses of the hearing dates, and shall subpoena witnesses if necessary, to ensure that the witnesses will be available to testify.
A witness will not be regarded as unavailable for purposes of showing “good cause” to continue the hearing if the witness is not properly notified of the hearing date or properly subpoenaed, as applicable.
2. Issues and Proposed Resolutions. The issue at the due process hearing, and
the proposed resolution, are listed below.
Issue:1 Was Student denied a free appropriate public education from March 15, 2015 to the present when District failed to appropriately assess Student in all areas of suspected disability and educational needs as District failed to conduct a psychoeducational assessment to address Student’s academics and attention deficits? Proposed Resolutions:
Student seeks an order that District is to provide Student with compensatory education and independent educational evaluations, and any other appropriate relief.
3. Exhibits. Exhibits shall be pre-marked and placed in three-ring exhibit
binders prior to the hearing. The parties shall use numbers to identify exhibits, but shall place the letter “S” or “D” in front of the exhibit to designate if it is a Student or District exhibit (for example, “S-5, S-6, or D-1, D-2”). Each exhibit shall be internally paginated by exhibit, or all of a party’s exhibits shall be Bates-stamped. Each exhibit binder shall contain a detailed table of contents. The parties shall serve their evidence binders on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). At the hearing, each party shall supply an exhibit binder containing its exhibits for use by the ALJ, and a second exhibit binder for use by witnesses. The parties may not serve exhibits on OAH prior to the hearing. In the event of duplicate exhibits, the most legible version will be used.
The parties shall meet and confer by 5:00 p.m. on August 18, 2017, to discuss and eliminate duplicate exhibits from the exhibit binders. The parties shall include, as exhibits, resumes for each witness expected to testify as to their professional credentials. District shall include as part of its exhibits the school calendar(s) for the years at issue. Notwithstanding the requirements of Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7), District shall serve a copy of the school calendar(s) and include the school calendar(s) in the binders provided for use by the witnesses and the ALJ not later than the first day of hearing.
If the parties intend to rely on individualized education programs, the parties shall attach all pages of the IEP(s), including copies of all actual signatures on the IEP(s) and any typewritten or handwritten notes or comments, if any, written on the IEP(s).
Student withdrew issues 1(B), 1(C), 1(D), 1(E), and 2 as outlined in Student’s Complaint.
Each exhibit shall consist of one document; separate documents may not be combined into one exhibit. Preferably, excerpts of an audio record of an individualized education program team meeting, if any, should be transcribed and offered as documentary evidence;
that portion of the audio record transcribed shall be provided to the opposing party with the transcript to allow an opportunity to verify the accuracy of the transcription. Transcription need not be done by a certified court reporter.
The parties shall exchange resumes for each witness who is expected to testify as to their professional credentials. Notwithstanding the requirements of Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7), the parties shall exchange resumes and curriculum vitae not later than 24 hours before the witness is scheduled to testify.
Except for good cause shown, or unless used solely for rebuttal or impeachment, any exhibit not included in the exhibit lists and not previously exchanged shall not be admitted into evidence at the hearing unless it is supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and the ALJ rules that it is admissible.
4. Witnesses. Each party is responsible for procuring the attendance at hearing
of its own witnesses. Each party shall make witnesses under its control reasonably available. The parties shall schedule their witnesses to avoid delays in the hearing and to minimize or eliminate the need for calling witnesses out of order. Neither party shall be permitted to call any witnesses not disclosed in the party’s final witness list served pursuant to Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7), except for good cause shown, supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and at the discretion of the ALJ.
The parties are encouraged to review and shorten their witness lists prior to the hearing, bearing in mind that evidence will be excluded if it is repetitive, cumulative, or insufficiently probative to justify the time it would take to hear.
The parties shall meet and confer by 5:00 p.m. on August 18, 2017, as to the schedule of witnesses and coordinate the availability and order of witnesses to ensure that there is a witness available to testify at all times during the hearing and to ensure that the hearing is completed as scheduled. District shall have witnesses available in case agreement on a witness list is not reached.
On the first day of hearing, before the first witness testifies, the parties shall provide the ALJ with one detailed hour-by-hour schedule of all witnesses expected to testify at the hearing. The list shall also include an estimate of time for each party’s direct and cross- examination. The ALJ has discretion to revise the witness schedule, as needed to maintain the flow and efficiency of the hearing. The parties shall be prepared at the end of each day of hearing to discuss the witnesses appearing on the next day and the time the testimony of each such witness is expected to take.
The ALJ has discretion to limit the number of witnesses who testify and the time allowed for witnesses’ testimony. Education Code, section 56505.1, subdivision (h), empowers the ALJ presiding at a due process hearing to set a reasonable limit on the length of the hearing after consideration of all of the following: (i) issues to be heard, (ii) complexity of facts to be proven, (iii) ability of the parties or their representatives to present their respective cases, and (iv) estimates of the parties as to the time needed to present their respective cases.
5. Scope of Witness Examination. Each witness shall be called to testify only
once, except for rebuttal purposes, and all parties shall examine the witness on all issues when the witness is first called. After the first direct and cross-examinations, each party shall be limited in examining the witness to only those matters raised in the immediately preceding examination. The order in which the parties present their cases in chief shall be subordinate to the need for each witness to appear only once.
6. Telephonic Testimony. Whether a witness may appear by telephone is a
matter within the discretion of the ALJ. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) Any party seeking to present a witness by telephone shall move in advance for leave to do so, unless the opposing party has stipulated that the witness may appear by telephone. The proponent of the witness shall provide the proposed witness with a complete set of exhibit binders from all parties, containing all of each party’s exhibits, prior to the hearing; and shall ensure that the hearing room has sound equipment that allows everyone in the room to hear the witness, and the witness to hear objections and rulings. No witness will be heard by telephone unless all these requirements have been fulfilled.
7. Electronic Recording of Hearing.
a. Audio Recording. Student’s motion to make an audio recording of the
hearing is granted, subject to the following conditions: 1) that OAH’s recording is the only official recording; 2) that the recording will be turned on and off at the same time as the ALJ’s recording, to avoid recording conversations while off the record; and 3) that operation of the party’s recording mechanism will not be allowed to delay the hearing. If District desires to make such a recording, District shall move for leave to do so in advance of the hearing, and the same conditions shall apply.
b. Video Recording. No party, witness or anyone else present may make
any video recording of any part of the proceedings. Any person doing so shall be subject to sanctions.
8. Order of Presentation of Evidence. In an administrative proceeding, the
burden of proof is ordinarily on the party requesting the hearing. (Schaffer v. Weast (2005)
546 U.S. 49, 56-62 [126 S.Ct. 528, 163 L.Ed.2d 387].) Here, Student is the petitioning party.
Accordingly, Student shall present his case-in-chief, followed by District.
9. District’s Motion to Continue Due Process Hearing:
On August 9, 2017, District filed a motion to continue the due process hearing.
District’s request was based on 1) a scheduling conflict with another due process hearing, OAH case number 2017080035, 2) the lack of sufficient time to prepare witnesses due to their unavailability, and 3) the removal of District employees from staff development training for the upcoming school year to attend the hearing.
On August 11, 2017, Student filed an opposition to the motion, arguing District’s grounds for a continuance do not constitute good cause.
A due process hearing must be conducted and a decision rendered within 45 days of receipt of the due process notice unless an extension is granted for good cause. (34 C.F.R.
§ 300.515(a) & (c) (2006); Ed. Code, §§ 56502, subd. (f), 56505, subd. (f)(3); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020.) As a result, continuances are disfavored. Good cause may include the unavailability of a party, counsel, or an essential witness due to death, illness or other excusable circumstances; substitution of an attorney when the substitution is required in the interests of justice; a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or another significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for hearing. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).) OAH considers all relevant facts and circumstances, including the proximity of the hearing date; previous continuances or delays; the length of continuance requested; the availability of other means to address the problem giving rise to the request; prejudice to a party or witness as a result of a continuance; the impact of granting a continuance on other pending hearings; whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; whether the parties have stipulated to a continuance; whether the interests of justice are served by the continuance;
and any other relevant fact or circumstance. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d).)
OAH has reviewed the request for good cause and considered all relevant facts and circumstances and the request is denied. The due process hearing in the matter of OAH case number 2017080035 settled and therefore, a scheduling conflict no longer exists.
Additionally, District and Student jointly filed a request to continue the due process hearing on April 28, 2017 and jointly proposed to continue the hearing to the current dates. OAH granted the joint continuance request. District knew or should have known at the time District sought a continuance request and agreed to the current scheduled dates for hearing, that District staff witnesses would be unavailable for hearing preparation for a period of time and that staff would be involved in training during the hearing dates, and waited to eve of hearing to request a continuance. Therefore, District failed to establish good cause to continue the hearing.
10. Motions. No pretrial motions are pending or contemplated. Any motion filed
after this date shall be supported by a declaration under penalty of perjury establishing good cause as to why the motion was not made prior to or during the prehearing conference of August 14, 2017.
11. Compensatory Education/Reimbursement. Any party seeking reimbursement
of expenditures shall present admissible evidence of these expenditures, or a stipulation to the amount of expenditures, as part of its case in chief. A party seeking compensatory education should provide evidence regarding the type, amount, duration, and need for any requested compensatory education.
12. Stipulations. Stipulations to pertinent facts, contentions or resolutions are
encouraged. Any proposed stipulation shall be submitted to the assigned ALJ in written form.
13. Conduct of Counsel and Hearing Room Decorum. Counsel, all parties, and all
witnesses shall conduct themselves in a professional and courteous manner at all times.
Cellular phones, pagers, recorders, and other noisemaking electronic devices shall be shut off or set to vibrate during the hearing unless permission to the contrary is obtained from the
ALJ.
14. Special Needs and Accommodations. Neither party indicated a need for any
accommodations in this case. A party or participant to this case, such as a witness, requiring reasonable accommodation to participate in the mediation or hearing may contact the assigned calendar staff, identified in the scheduling order, at (916) 263-0880, as soon as the need is known. Additional information concerning requests for reasonable accommodation is available on OAH’s website at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/oah/Home/Accessibility.aspx.
15. Hearing Closed to the Public. The hearing will be closed to the public unless
Student requests it be open.
16. Settlement. The parties are encouraged to continue working together
to reach an agreement before the due process hearing. The parties shall inform OAH in writing immediately should they reach a settlement or otherwise resolve the dispute before the scheduled hearing. In addition, if a settlement is reached within five days of the scheduled start of the due process hearing, the parties shall also inform OAH of the settlement by telephone at (916) 263-0880.
IF A FULL AND FINAL WRITTEN SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS REACHED
AFTER 5:00 P.M. THE DAY PRIOR TO HEARING, THE PARTIES SHALL LEAVE A
VOICEMAIL MESSAGE REGARDING THE SETTLEMENT AT (916) 274-6035. THE
PARTIES SHOULD ALSO LEAVE CONTACT INFORMATION SUCH AS CELLULAR
PHONE NUMBERS OF EACH PARTY OR COUNSEL FOR EACH PARTY. THE
PARTIES SHOULD SIMULTANEOUSLY FAX THE SIGNATURE PAGE OF THE
SIGNED AGREEMENT OR A LETTER WITHDRAWING THE CASE TO THE OAH AT
THE FAXINATION LINE at 916-376-6319.
Dates for hearing will not be cancelled until the letter of withdrawal or signature page of the signed agreement has been received by OAH. If an agreement in principle is reached, the parties should plan to attend the scheduled hearing unless different arrangements have been agreed upon by the assigned ALJ. The assigned ALJ will check for messages the evening prior to the hearing or the morning of the hearing.
17. Failure to comply with this order may result in the exclusion of evidence or
other sanctions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: August 14, 2017
ROMMEL P. CRUZ
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings
