California OAH special education order · May 15, 2017
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss
OAH Case No. 2017050174 · ALJ Linda Johnson
OAH denied Student's motion to dismiss District's assessment case because it asked for a ruling on the merits, and special education law has no summary judgment procedure.
This case went to decision
Carlsbad Unified School District v. Student: Carlsbad Unified may reassess a 14-year-old with autism without parent consent; request for advisory FAPE order denied. (2017)
Summary
District filed a due process complaint seeking to assess Student. Student moved to dismiss, and District opposed. OAH denied the motion because it was not limited to claims facially outside OAH's jurisdiction but instead sought a ruling on the merits. A hearing is required to decide those factual disputes, and all scheduled dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
Parents cannot use a motion to dismiss to defeat a district's request to assess on the merits. OAH will only dismiss claims that are plainly outside its jurisdiction, so factual disputes must be resolved at hearing.
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:
CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL OAH Case No. 2017050174
DISTRICT,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
v. DISMISS
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
On May 8, 2017, Student filed a motion to dismiss with the Office of Administrative Hearings. On May 11, 2017, District filed an opposition.
Although OAH will grant motions to dismiss allegations that are facially outside of OAH jurisdiction (e.g., civil rights claims, section 504 claims, enforcement of settlement agreements, incorrect parties, etc…..), special education law does not provide for a summary judgment procedure. Here, District filed a request for a due process hearing to assess Student. Student’s motion to dismiss is not limited to matters that are facially outside of OAH jurisdiction, but instead seeks a ruling on the merits. Accordingly, the motion is denied as a hearing is required to determine those factual contentions. All dates currently set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: May 15, 2017
LINDA JOHNSON
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings