California OAH special education order · May 2, 2018
Order Denying Motion to Consolidate
OAH Case No. 2018030452, 2018041249 · ALJ Sabrina Kong
OAH denied Poway Unified's last-minute motion to consolidate its assessment case with Student's case because Student's consultation-services claims and District's assessment claims were too different to save time.
Summary
Student's case challenged District's reduction of consultation services from The Autism Group and its failure to give prior written notice before the reduction. A few hours before Student's prehearing conference, District filed its own complaint seeking to assess Student in many areas without parental consent. District also moved to consolidate the two cases and asked that its issues be heard on Student's hearing dates. Student opposed, and OAH denied consolidation because the issues were distinct enough to justify separate hearings and combining them would not further judicial economy.
Why it matters
A district cannot fold its own assessment case into a parent's pending case just by filing at the last minute when the issues don't overlap. Parents can oppose consolidation that would cut short their time to prepare a defense against the district's claims.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11507.3, subd. (a)
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a)
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. 2018030452 v. ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE
POWAY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
On March 9, 2018, Student filed her due process hearing complaint with the Office of Administrative Hearings, OAH Case no. 2018030452 (Student’s Case). The pre-hearing conference on Student’s Case was held on April 27, 2018, where Student withdrew all issues regarding inappropriate assessments, without prejudice, leaving only issues regarding District’s inappropriate reduction of consultation services from The Autism Group, and District’s failure to provide prior written notice to parents before reducing consultation services for hearing. At the PHC, the parties informed the ALJ that District had filed its complaint along with a motion to consolidate a few hours before the PHC, and requested that the issues in District’s case proceed on the currently scheduled hearing dates in Student’s Case should consolidation be granted.
The issues in District’s due process hearing complaint, OAH Case no. 2018041249, was whether it had the right to assess Student in the areas of academic achievement, motor development, processing, speech/language, intellectual development, social emotion, adaptive behavior, health and need for and aide without parental consent. On May 1, 2018, Student filed an opposition to the consolidation motion on the following grounds: (a) that District’s last minute filing of its complaint and consolidation motion, if granted, would significantly prejudice Student’s right to prepare a defense of District’s issues; (b) the issues in Student’s case are different from District’s assessment case, and the interests of judicial economy would not be furthered by consolidation.
Consolidation Although no statute or regulation specifically provides a standard to be applied in deciding a motion to consolidate special education cases, OAH will generally consolidate matters that involve: a common question of law and/or fact; the same parties; and when consolidation of the matters furthers the interests of judicial economy by saving time or preventing inconsistent rulings. (See Gov. Code, § 11507.3, subd. (a) [administrative proceedings may be consolidated if they involve a common question of law or fact]; Code of Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a) [same applies to civil cases].)
Student’s Case is exclusively about District’s termination of consultation services from The Autism Group and prior written notice regarding same. District’s Case is about enforcing its right to assess in a number of areas without parental consent. The issues in Student’s and District’s cases are distinct enough to justify separate hearings. Based on the above, consolidation does not further the interests of judicial economy. The motion to consolidate District’s Case with Student’s Case is denied.
ORDER
1. District’s Motion to Consolidate is denied. Student’s case shall proceed as
scheduled.
2. District’s Case will proceed on its own scheduled hearing dates.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: May 2, 2018
SABRINA KONG
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings