California OAH special education order · June 8, 2017
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss
OAH Case No. 2017050174 · ALJ Linda Johnson
OAH denied Student's motion to dismiss District's assessment case as moot, because District's complaint also sought to have Student made available for assessment, not just a signed assessment plan.
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
Student moved to dismiss District's complaint as moot because Parent had signed the assessment plan, and Student provided a copy of the signed plan. District opposed, saying Parent still had not made Student available for the assessment. OAH denied the motion. Special education law has no summary judgment procedure, the motion sought a ruling on the merits rather than raising a matter facially outside OAH's jurisdiction, and District's complaint covered making Student available as well as signing the plan. All dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
Signing an assessment plan may not end a district's case to assess. If the district's complaint also asks that the student be made available for testing, the case can go forward. OAH will not use a motion to dismiss to decide disputed facts on the merits.
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 June 1, 2017, Student filed a motion to dismiss with the Office of Administrative Hearings stating Parent signed the assessment plan therefore the issue for hearing is moot.
On June 6, 2017, Student filed a request for dismissal for mootness including a copy of the signed assessment plan. On June 7, 2017, District filed an opposition stating although Parent signed the assessment plan, Parent had not made Student available for the assessment.
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, the Motion is not limited to matters that are facially outside of OAH jurisdiction, but instead seeks a ruling on the merits. Although Student provided a copy of the signed assessment plan, District’s complaint is not limited to Parent signing the assessment plan, but also Parent making Student available for said assessment. Accordingly, the motion is denied. All dates currently set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: June 08, 2017 for
LINDA JOHNSON
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings