California OAH special education order · August 10, 2017
Order Denying Student's Request to Set Aside Settlement Agreement
OAH Case No. 2017061134 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH denied Parent's request to set aside a signed settlement with Desert Sands Unified, ruling it has no authority to undo a settlement for mistake and that a court action is the proper remedy.
Summary
Parent tried to rescind consent to an August 1, 2017 settlement agreement with District, which was still awaiting District board approval, citing new information about a preferred residential placement for Student. District did not respond. OAH denied the request because nothing in the agreement gave Parent a right to rescind, and OAH lacks legal authority to modify a settlement or decide whether it resulted from mistake, duress, or impossibility. A party who wants to set aside a settlement must file a court action.
Why it matters
Once a parent signs a mediated settlement, OAH will not undo it, even before the board approves it, unless the agreement itself allows rescission. Families should confirm placement options and negotiate any right to withdraw before signing.
Key authority cited
- Y.G. v. Riverside Unified School Dist. (C.D.Cal. 2011) 774 F.Supp.2d 1055
- Porter v. Manhattan Beach Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 307 F.3d 1064
- Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a)
- Vaillette v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 680
- Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 384
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. G. W. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co. (1968) 69 Cal.2d 33
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. 2017061134 v. ORDER DENYING STUDENT’S
REQUEST TO SET ASIDE
DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
DISTRICT.
On August 10, 2017, Student moved to set aside the settlement agreement reached with Desert Sands Unified School District on August 1, 2017, which is subject to approval by the District’s Board on August 15, 2017. District has not filed a response.
Student’s Request to Set Aside Settlement Agreement On August 10, 2017, Parent, on behalf of Student, informed OAH that she was rescinding their consent to the August 1, 2017 Settlement Agreement entered between Parent and District. The settlement agreement is subject to approval by District’s board, which is scheduled to occur on August 15, 2017.
Student’s August 10, 2017 motion requests that OAH set aside the settlement agreement because of new information regarding the availability of a more preferred residential placement for Student that was not known to District as of the mediation.
Settlement agreements are interpreted using the same rules that apply to interpretation of contracts. (Vaillette v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 680, 686, citing Adams v. Johns-Manville Corp. (9th Cir. 1989) 876 F.2d 702, 704.) “Ordinarily, the words of the document are to be given their plain meaning and understood in their common sense;
the parties' expressed objective intent, not their unexpressed subjective intent, governs.” (Id.
at p. 686.) If a contract is ambiguous, i.e., susceptible to more than one interpretation, then extrinsic evidence may be used to interpret it. (Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. G. W. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co. (1968) 69 Cal.2d 33, 37-40.) Even if a contract appears to be unambiguous on its face, a party may offer relevant extrinsic evidence to demonstrate that the contract contains a latent ambiguity; however, to demonstrate an ambiguity, the contract must be “reasonably susceptible” to the interpretation offered by the party introducing extrinsic evidence. (Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 384, 391, 393.)
The parties signed the Settlement Agreement on August 1, 2017, that resolved all claims in this matter. Student did not establish that anything in the agreement gave Parent the right to rescind to the agreement. As to Student’s contention that OAH should set aside the agreement because it was the product of mistake, OAH lacks the legal authority to set aside a settlement agreement. Pursuant to Y.G. v. Riverside Unified School Dist. (C.D.Cal.
2011) 774 F.Supp.2d 1055, 1061-1062, OAH does not have the authority to modify a settlement agreement or determine whether it was obtained by duress, mistake or impossibility. (See, Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a).) A party’s remedy to set aside the terms of a settlement agreement is to institute a court action. (See, Porter v. Manhattan Beach Unified School District (9th Cir. 2000) 307 F.3d 1064, 1074.) Accordingly, Student’s request to set aside the settlement agreement is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: August 10, 2017
PETER PAUL CASTILLO
Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings