California OAH special education order · March 28, 2019
Order Granting Milpitas' Motion to Strike Confidential Settlement Discussions From Parent's Reply to Milpitas' Closing Brief
OAH Case No. 2018100006 · ALJ Marian H. Tully
OAH struck the part of Parent's reply brief that revealed confidential settlement discussions, but refused Milpitas' request to strike new arguments or evidence in the reply.
This case went to decision
Milpitas Unified School District v. Student: Milpitas Unified may not implement its 2018 IEP without consent after holding meetings without the parent and making an unclear offer. (2019)
Summary
After Parent filed a reply to Milpitas' closing brief, Milpitas moved to strike parts of it. Milpitas gave two reasons: the reply revealed confidential settlement discussions on pages 2-3, and it raised new arguments and evidence. OAH granted the motion on the settlement material and struck a specific passage from page 2 through page 3. OAH denied the request to strike new arguments or evidence.
Why it matters
Families should keep confidential settlement talks out of briefs filed with OAH, because the judge will strike that material. OAH did not strike reply arguments just because the district called them new.
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:
MILPITAS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, OAH Case No. 2018100006 v. ORDER GRANTING MILPITAS’
MOTION TO STRIKE CONFIDENTIAL
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT. SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS FROM
PARENT’S REPLY TO MILPITAS’
CLOSING BRIEF
On March 25, 2018, Parent filed a Reply to Milpitas Unified School District’s closing brief. On March 25, 2018 Milpitas filed a motion to strike portions of Parent’s reply. The motion stated two grounds, first that Parent had revealed confidential settlement discussions at pages 2-3 of the reply brief; and second that the brief had raised new arguments and evidence.
The motion to strike references to confidential settlement discussion is granted. The motion to strike arguments or evidence is denied.
ORDER
1. The portion of Parent’s Reply filed on March 25, 2018, that refers to confidential
settlement discussions is stricken.
2. The stricken portion begins on the sixth line of the second page with “a. (1) The
right…” and continues through the words “…FAPE within LRE.” in the seventh line of the third page.
DATE: March 28, 2019
MARIAN H. TULLY
Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings