California OAH special education order · June 29, 2018
Order Granting Motion to File Second Amended Complaint
OAH Case No. 2018030762, 2018041298 · ALJ Tara Doss
OAH granted Student's timely, unopposed motion to file a second amended complaint and denied District's request to keep the hearing dates, because an amended complaint restarts all due process timelines.
This case went to decision
Student v. San Diego Unified School District (consolidated): San Diego Unified wins on all issues and may implement a ninth grader's February 2018 IEP without parental consent. (2018)
Summary
After retaining counsel, Student moved to file a second amended complaint to correct the issues and remedies based on facts not previously identified. District did not oppose the amendment but asked that the hearing dates stay the same. OAH granted the motion as timely and deemed the second amended complaint filed on the date of the order. It denied District's request because filing an amended complaint restarts the hearing timelines under federal law, and OAH said it would issue a new scheduling order.
Why it matters
Families who hire an attorney partway through a case can usually amend their complaint to fix issues and remedies. Districts should expect the hearing timeline to restart when an amendment is allowed, even if they ask to keep the original dates.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(ii)
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 Consolidated Matters of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2018030762 v.
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, OAH Case No. 2018041298 v.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO FILE
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
On March 16, 2018, Student filed a Request for Due Process Hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming San Diego Unified School District. On April 27, 2018, District filed a Request for Due Process Hearing with OAH, naming Student. On May 4, 2018, OAH consolidated the matters, designating Student’s case as primary. On May 14, 2018, OAH granted Student’s Motion to Amend the complaint to include issues that arose after the filing of the original complaint. On June 21, 2018, Student retained legal counsel;
and on June 22, 2018, Student’s attorney filed a Notice of Representation.
On June 25, 2018, Student’s attorney filed a Motion to File a Second Amended Complaint to correct the issues and remedies based on facts not previously identified in the complaint. On June 27, 2018, District filed a non-opposition to Student’s motion. However, District requested that the hearing dates remain as scheduled.
An amended complaint may be filed when either: (a) the other party consents in writing and is given the opportunity to resolve the complaint through a resolution session, or (b) the hearing officer grants permission, provided the hearing officer may grant such permission at any time more than five days prior to the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C.
§1415(c)(2)(E)(i).) The filing of an amended complaint restarts the applicable timelines for the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C. §1415(c)(2)(E)(ii).)
Student’s Motion to File a Second Amended Complaint is timely and is granted.
District does not oppose the filing of the second amended complaint. The second amended complaint shall be deemed filed on the date of this Order. District’s request that the hearing dates remain as scheduled is denied. All applicable timelines shall be reset as of the date of this Order. OAH will issue a Scheduling Order with the new dates.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: June 29, 2018
TARA DOSS
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings