California OAH special education order · August 24, 2017
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss
OAH Case No. 2017051304 · ALJ Charles Marson
OAH denied Student's unopposed motion to dismiss Fairfield-Suisun's complaint because it was really a summary judgment motion needing a full hearing on the facts, a procedure special education law does not allow.
This case went to decision
Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District v. Student: Fairfield-Suisun Unified may move a hard-of-hearing student with intellectual disability to a functional academics class without parent consent. (2017)
Summary
Student moved to dismiss the due process complaint Fairfield-Suisun filed, and the district did not respond. OAH found that the motion depended on factual claims that could only be tested at a full hearing, so it was really a request for summary judgment. OAH dismisses only claims that are plainly outside its jurisdiction, such as civil rights, Section 504, or settlement enforcement claims, and special education law has no summary judgment procedure. The motion was denied and all hearing dates were kept.
Why it matters
Families facing a district-filed complaint usually cannot end the case early by arguing the facts in a motion to dismiss. Unless a claim is plainly outside OAH's jurisdiction, the dispute will be decided at hearing, so parents should prepare to present their evidence there.
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:
FAIRFIELD-SUISUN UNIFIED SCHOOL OAH Case No. 2017051304
DISTRICT,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
v. DISMISS
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
On August 11, 2017, Student filed a motion to dismiss the complaint herein. No response to the motion has been received from Fairfield-Suisun.
Although the motion is entitled a motion to dismiss, it is in substance a motion for summary judgment. it seeks dismissal based on factual allegations the accuracy of which cannot be determined without a full hearing.
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 of Fairfield-Suisun’s claim..
Accordingly, the motion is DENIED. All dates currently set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: August 24, 2017
CHARLES MARSON
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings