California OAH special education order · November 16, 2018
Order Denying Bellflower's Motion to Exclude Student's Proposed Exhibits; Continuing Due Process Hearing; and Denying Student's Motion for Sanctions for Bellflower's Frivolous Tactics and Actions Creating Unnecessary Delay
OAH Case No. 2018071234 · ALJ Christine Arden
OAH denied Student's motion for sanctions against Bellflower and denied Bellflower's motion to exclude Student's exhibits for improper service, continuing the hearing so Bellflower could review the exhibits.
This case went to decision
Student v. Bellflower Unified School District: Bellflower Unified must fund six IEEs, 52 hours of instruction, and private school tuition after ignoring a prior OAH order. (2019)
Summary
On the first day of hearing, the parties argued two motions before any witness testified. Bellflower asked OAH to exclude Student's proposed exhibits, saying Student had not properly served them. Student asked OAH to sanction Bellflower for frivolous tactics and actions causing unnecessary delay. The ALJ denied both motions for reasons stated on the record and, at Bellflower's request for time to review Student's exhibit binder, continued the hearing to November 27, 2018.
Why it matters
A dispute over exhibit service is more likely to delay the hearing than to keep evidence out. Sanctions for delay tactics are hard to win, especially when the ALJ can fix the problem with a short continuance.
People named in the order
- Tania Whiteleather, Student's attorney
- Eric Bathen, District's attorney
- Matthew Adair, Program Administrator, Bellflower Unified School District
- Christine Arden, Administrative Law Judge
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. 2018071234 v. ORDER DENYING BELLFLOWER’S
MOTION TO EXCLUDE STUDENT’S
BELLFLOWER UNIFIED SCHOOL PROPOSED EXHIBITS; CONTINUING
DISTRICT . DUE PROCESS HEARING; AND
DENYING STUDENT’S MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS FOR BELLFLOWER’S
FRIVOLOUS TACTICS AND
ACTIONS CREATING
UNNECESSARY DELAY
The due process hearing in this matter commenced on November 13, 2018, at 1:30 p.m. Tania Whiteleather, Attorney at Law, and Mother, appeared on behalf of Student. Eric Bathen, Attorney at Law, and Matthew Adair, Program Administrator, appeared on behalf of Bellflower Unified School District.
Before opening statements, and before any witness was called, the parties argued Bellflower Unified School District’s Motion to Exclude Student’s Proposed Exhibits and Student’s Motion for Sanctions for Bellflower’s Frivolous Tactics and Actions Creating Unnecessary Delay.
On November 9, 2018, Bellflower filed a Motion to Exclude Student’s Proposed Exhibits on the grounds Student did not properly serve Student’s exhibits on Bellflower. On November 13, 2018, Student filed an opposition. The motion to exclude evidence was denied for the reasons set forth on the record. At Bellflower’s request for time to review Student’s exhibit binder, the hearing was continued to November 27, 2018, at 9:30 a.m.
Petitioner’s Motion for Sanctions for Bellflower’s Frivolous Tactics and Actions Creating Unnecessary Delay was denied for the reasons set forth on the record.
DATE: November 16, 2018
CHRISTINE ARDEN
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings