California OAH special education order · March 20, 2019
Order of Determination of Insufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2018100884 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff
OAH found Student's amended complaint insufficient because it gave no proposed resolutions, even though its four issues and supporting facts were adequately pled; Student may amend within 14 days.
Summary
Grossmont filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's amended due process complaint. OAH found that the complaint's four issues, their many sub-issues, and the supporting facts gave Grossmont enough notice to respond and to take part in a resolution session and mediation. But the complaint did not include any proposed resolutions, which federal law requires to the extent they are known and available, so OAH found it insufficient. Student was given 14 days to file a new amended complaint or face dismissal, and all existing dates were vacated.
Why it matters
A complaint with well-pled issues and facts can still be found insufficient if it leaves out proposed resolutions. Parents should always state the remedies they want, because an omission like this delays the case and restarts the hearing timelines.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(IV)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(D)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185 (2003)
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 FR 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. 2018100884 v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
INSUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
GROSSMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL COMPLAINT
DISTRICT.
On October 19, 2018, Parent on behalf of Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request1 with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming Grossmont Union High School District. On December 4, 2018, OAH granted the parties’ joint request for mediation and to continue the hearing dates for this matter. On March 4, 2019, OAH granted Student’s request to amend his complaint. On March 18, 2019, Grossmont filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to Student’s amended 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).
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, 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, 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).
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
The facts alleged in Student’s amended complaint are sufficient to put Grossmont on notice of the issues forming the basis of the complaint. The amended complaint identifies four issues with numerous specific sub-issues that identify the problems alleged. The amended complaint also provides adequate related facts about the problems to permit Grossmont to respond to the complaint and participate in a resolution session and mediation.
Therefore, Student’s statement of the claims is sufficient.
However, Student failed to request proposed resolutions in the amended complaint. A complaint is required to include proposed resolutions to the problem, to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(IV).) Consequently, Student has not met the statutorily required standard of stating a resolution to the extent known and available to him at the time and the amended complaint is insufficient for that reason.
ORDER
1. Student’s amended complaint is insufficiently pled under section title 20
United States Code 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).2
3. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20 U.S.C.
section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the complaint will be
dismissed.
2 The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
DATE: March 20, 2019
PAUL H. KAMOROFF
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings