California OAH special education order · November 30, 2018
Order Granting Motion to Consolidate
OAH Case No. 2018110660, 2018090129 · ALJ Tara Doss
OAH consolidated Newark's and Student's due process cases over Newark's objection because both turn on whether the March 27, 2018 IEP offered Student a FAPE.
Summary
Student filed a due process complaint against Newark and moved to consolidate it with Newark's earlier case, which raised a single issue about the March 27, 2018 IEP. Newark opposed, arguing that Student's four issues reached back to November 2016 and were broader, leaving only slight overlap. OAH granted consolidation because both cases share the common question of whether the March 27, 2018 IEP offered a FAPE, will likely involve the same witnesses and documents, and one hearing saves time and resources. Student's case became the primary case, the dates in Newark's case were vacated, and the 45-day decision timeline runs from the filing of Student's complaint.
Why it matters
When a district files first on a single IEP, a parent can file a broader complaint and consolidate the two cases so everything is heard together on the parent's timeline. A wider time period or more issues in the parent's case does not defeat consolidation when the cases share a core question.
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 Consolidated Matters of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2018110660 v.
NEWARK UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
NEWARK UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, OAH Case No. 2018090129 v.
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE
On September 6, 2018, Newark Unified School District filed a Request for Due Process Hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming Student. OAH designated the matter as OAH case number 2018090129 (District’s Case). On September 19, 2018, Newark filed an Amended Request for Due Process Hearing.
On November 19, 2018, Student filed a Request for Due Process Hearing with OAH, naming Newark. OAH designated the matter as OAH case number 2018110660 (Student’s Case). Also on November 19, 2018, Student filed a Motion to Consolidate District’s Case with Student’s Case, and requested that the due process hearing be set according to the dates OAH scheduled in Student’s Case.
On November 21, 2018, Newark filed an opposition to Student’s Motion to Consolidate on the grounds that the time period and scope of Student’s issues are broader than the single issue in Newark’s case. On November 26, 2018, Student filed a reply to Newark’s opposition.
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].)
Newark’s amended complaint involves one issue: whether it offered Student a free appropriate public education at a March 27, 2018 individualized education program team meeting. Student’s complaint involves four issues that date back to November 2016, including allegations that the March 27, 2018 IEP denied Student a FAPE. Newark’s argument that consolidation should be denied because there is only “slight overlap” in Student’s Case and District’s Case, is not persuasive. Both cases involve common questions of law and fact; specifically, whether the March 27, 2018 IEP offered Student a FAPE. For this reason, the parties are likely to rely upon many of the same witnesses and documentary evidence at a due process hearing. As such, convening one due process hearing to resolve both cases furthers the interests of judicial economy by saving time and resources.
Accordingly, consolidation is granted.
ORDER
1. Student’s Motion to Consolidate is granted.
2. Student’s Case, OAH case number 2018110660, shall be the primary case in the
consolidated matter. All future correspondence shall be filed in Student’s Case.
3. All dates previously set in District’s Case, OAH case number 2018090129, are
vacated. The consolidated matter shall proceed on the dates set in Student’s Case.
4. The 45-day timeline for issuance of the decision in the consolidated matter shall
be based on the date of the filing of the complaint in Student’s Case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: November 30, 2018
TARA DOSS
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings