California OAH special education order · November 8, 2017
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Is Sufficient
OAH Case No. 2017110039 · ALJ Christine Arden
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient, ruling that expedited discipline claims cannot be challenged for sufficiency and that the remaining claims gave District enough facts to prepare.
Summary
District filed a notice of insufficiency against Student's complaint. The complaint challenged Student's removal from school and attempted expulsion after he brought a knife to school, and also raised bullying, IEPs that did not address his behavioral, emotional and academic needs, and a failure to assess behavior. OAH ruled that expedited claims under the IDEA's discipline provisions are not subject to sufficiency challenges because of their short timelines. It found the rest of the complaint gave District enough issues and facts to respond, take part in resolution and mediation, and prepare for hearing, and it confirmed all scheduled dates.
Why it matters
Districts cannot use a sufficiency challenge to slow down expedited discipline claims. A complaint that plainly describes the problems and the related facts will generally survive a sufficiency notice, because the pleading rules are read liberally.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 Fed. Reg. 46540-46541, 46699
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. 2017110039 v. ORDER DETERMINING DUE
PROCESS COMPLAINT IS
COMPTON UNIFIED SCHOOL SUFFICIENT
DISTRICT.
On October 30, 2017, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request1 (complaint) with the Office of Administrative Hearings naming Compton Unified School District (District).
OAH determined that the complaint stated expedited and non-expedited claims. On November 1, 2017, OAH issued its Scheduling Order Setting Dual Hearing Dates Including Expedited Hearing, Prehearing Conference and Mediation. On November 3, 2017, District filed with OAH its response to the complaint.
On November 6, 2017, District filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to Student’s complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties to a due process hearing request have the right to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
Title 20 United States Code section 1415(k)(3) permits a party to request an expedited hearing to appeal a decision regarding a disciplinary change of placement, such as placement in an alternative education setting or a manifestation determination regarding student conduct. This section requires an expedited hearing to occur within 20 school days of the date the hearing is requested. There is no provision similar to that in title 20 United States Code section 1415(c)(2)(A) for testing the sufficiency of a request for an expedited hearing pursuant to section 1415(k).
A complaint is sufficient if it contains: (1) a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to the proposed initiation or change concerning the identification, 1 A request for a due process hearing under Education Code section 56502 is the due process complaint notice required under title 20 U.S.C. section 1415(b)(7)(A).
evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to the child; (2) facts relating to the problem; and (3) a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C.
§ 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. (See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.)
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.) The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept. 10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v.
Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd. (M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. of Educ. (3d Cir. 2009) 306 Fed.Appx.
772, 775 [nonpub. opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
Student’s complaint alleges District removed Student from school on October 20, 2017, after he brought a knife to school, and since that time District has improperly attempted to expel him. The complaint further alleges Student was bullied at school and, over the last two years all of Student’s individual educational programs have failed to appropriately address his behavioral, emotional and academic deficits, despite Mother raising these problems to District’s attention. The complaint also alleges District failed to assess Student’s behavior, even though this is an area of Student’s suspected disability, and the services District provided to Student failed to adequately address his behavioral, emotional and academic problems.
The expedited claims are not subject to challenge under a title 20 United States Code section 1415(c)(2)(A) due to the accelerated time frame required by title 20 United States Code section 1415(k). Overall, Student’s complaint identifies issues and adequate related facts about the problems to permit District to respond to the complaint, participate in a resolution session and mediation, and prepare for a hearing.
Therefore, Student’s complaint is sufficient.
ORDER
1. The complaint is sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
DATE: November 8, 2017
CHRISTINE ARDEN
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings