California OAH special education order · August 14, 2017

Order Following Prehearing Conference

OAH Case No. 2017050981 · ALJ Linda Johnson

OAH set District's case to implement its IEP without Parent consent for hearing and limited Student to District's witnesses and exhibits because Student filed no prehearing conference statement and did not appear.

Issues set for hearing Prehearing conference orders

This case went to decision

Ontario-Montclair School District v. Student: Ontario-Montclair School District may implement its October 2016 IEP placing a third grader with autism in a special day class. (2017)

Summary

District filed for due process asking OAH to rule that its October 3, 2016 IEP, completed on February 28, 2017, offered Student a free appropriate public education, so District could implement it without Parent consent. No one appeared for Student at the August 14, 2017 telephonic prehearing conference, even though OAH called several times and left two messages. The ALJ set hearing for August 22 through 24, 2017, at District's offices, and granted District's request to let a witness testify by phone. Because Student filed no prehearing conference statement or exhibit list, Student was limited to the two witnesses Student named at an earlier June 12, 2017 conference and to the witnesses and exhibits District listed, unless Student shows good cause.

Why it matters

Parents who skip the prehearing conference or do not file a prehearing conference statement can lose the right to present their own witnesses and documents at hearing. This is especially risky when a district is asking OAH to let it implement an IEP without parent consent.

Key authority cited

  • Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49
  • J.W. v. Fresno Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431
  • Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (e)(7)
  • Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g)

People named in the order

  • Ann Perry, Student's witness (permitted to testify by telephone)
  • Denise Buenorostro, Student's witness (permitted to testify by telephone)
  • Kristin Garcia, District's witness (permitted to testify by telephone)

Topics

prehearing conference implement iep without consent district-filed case failure to file phc statement telephonic testimony witness limits

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:

ONTARIO-MONTCLAIR SCHOOL OAH Case No. 2017050981

DISTRICT,

ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING

v. CONFERENCE

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.

On August 14, 2017, a telephonic prehearing conference was held before Administrative Law Judge Linda Johnson, Office of Administrative Hearings. Cynthia Vargas, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Ontario-Montclair School District School District. There was no appearance on behalf of Student. 1 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 District’s offices located at 950 West D Street, Ontario, California 91761. The hearing shall begin at 9:30 a.m. the first day of the hearing, 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, August 23, 2017, 12:00 p.m. on Thursday, August 24, 2017, and at 9:00 a.m. all other days, unless otherwise ordered.

As ordered in the scheduling order, the named local educational agency shall 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 certified that the facilities used for this case comply with the law. The local educational agency shall inform OAH within two days of the date of this order if it is unable to comply with this order.

Prior to the beginning of the hearing, District shall ensure that the hearing room is configured into a courtroom setting and shall have at a minimum (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 provide drinking water and tissue to all parties, witnesses and the ALJ.

The same hearing room shall be used for each day of hearing and shall be available at least OAH called the phone number listed for Student several times and left two messages, however, no one answered on behalf of Student.

one hour prior to the commencement of the hearing each day. The hearing room shall be locked following the hearing each night. District shall ensure that the hearing room and access to it are in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

2. Issues and Proposed Resolutions. The issues at the due process hearing, and

the proposed resolutions, are listed below.

Issue2:

(1) Did District offer Student a free appropriate public education in its October 3, 2016 individualized education program, completed on February 28, 2017, such that it may implement the IEP without Parent consent? Proposed Resolution:

(1) An order stating District may implement the October 3, 2016 IEP, completed on February 28, 2017, without parent consent.

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.

If the parties intend to rely on IEP’s, 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). Excerpts of an audio record of an IEP team meeting, if any, should, in addition to the audio record offered, be transcribed and offered as documentary evidence. That portion of the audio record transcribed shall be provided to the opposing party along with the transcript to allow an opportunity to verify the accuracy of the transcription. Transcriptions need not be prepared by a certified court reporter.

District shall include in its exhibits, the school calendar(s) for each school year (including extended school year) at issue.

The issues have been rephrased and reorganized for clarity. The ALJ has authority to redefine a party’s issues, so long as no substantive changes are made. (J.W. v. Fresno Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431, 442-443.)

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 prehearing conference statement except for good cause shown, supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and at the discretion of the ALJ.

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 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.

Student did not file a prehearing conference statement, and has not provided a list of proposed exhibits or witnesses, with the exception of two witnesses Student identified during the PHC on June 12, 2017. Unless the ALJ rules otherwise, based upon a showing of good cause as to why a witness or an exhibit was not identified prior to the PHC, Student will be limited to utilizing the witnesses and exhibits identified by District in its PHC statement and .

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. Neither party requested telephonic testimony.

The previous order allowing Student’s witnesses Ann Perry and Denise Buenorostro to testify telephonically remains in effect. Student shall provide Ann Perry and Denise Buenorostro with a complete exhibit binder from each party, containing all of each party’s exhibits, prior to the hearing. District’s motion to allow Kristin Garcia to testify telephonically is granted. District shall provide Kristin Garcia with a complete exhibit binder from each party, 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.

7. Electronic Recording of Hearing.

a. Audio Recording. Neither party moved to make an audio recording of

the hearing. If either party desires to make such a recording the party shall move for leave to do so in advance of the hearing.

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, District is the petitioning party.

Accordingly, District shall present its case-in-chief, followed by Student.

9. 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.

10. Stipulations. Stipulations to pertinent facts, contentions or resolutions are

encouraged. Any proposed stipulation shall be submitted to the assigned ALJ in written form.

11. 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.

12. Special Needs and Accommodations. Aside from the audio recording, 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:

http://www.dgs.ca.gov/oah/Home/Accessibility.aspx.

13. Hearing Closed To the Public. The hearing will be closed to the public unless

Student requests it be open.

14. 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 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.

15. Failure to comply with this order may result in the exclusion of evidence or

other sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: August 14, 2017

LINDA JOHNSON

Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings