California OAH special education order · April 9, 2019
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Insufficient
OAH Case No. 2019030759 · ALJ Ted Mann
OAH found Student's complaint insufficient because it described a school incident involving a knife or paper cutter and discipline but did not connect it to special education or a denial of FAPE.
Summary
Colton filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. The complaint raised three problems about a school incident involving a knife or art pen paper cutter that led to discipline by Director Scott Baggs, and it proposed a resolution for each. OAH found the complaint insufficient because it gave no facts tying the incident to special education, eligibility, or a denial of a free appropriate public education. Student may file an amended complaint within 14 days or the case will be dismissed, and all dates were vacated.
Why it matters
A complaint about a school discipline incident must explain how it relates to the child's special education, eligibility, or FAPE. Parents without a lawyer can ask OAH for a mediator to help them identify the issues before they amend.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(D)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II)
- Ed. Code, § 56505
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
People named in the order
- Scott Baggs, District director
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. 2019030759 v. ORDER DETERMINING DUE
PROCESS COMPLAINT
COLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL INSUFFICIENT
DISTRICT.
On March 18, 2019, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming Colton Joint Unified School District. On March 28, 2019, Colton filed a response to Student’s complaint. On April 2, 2019, Colton filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to Student’s 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, supra, at p. 34.) The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the 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).
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
Student’s complaint alleges three problems. The problems have to do with something which happened at school, involved a knife or art pen paper cutter, and caused some sort of disciplinary action by Director Scott Baggs. The complaint also states a proposed resolution for each problem.
However, a complaint must also include facts that connect what happened at school to special education, special education eligibility, or whether Colton’s actions denied Student a free appropriate public education under the IDEA or California law. Without this information, Student’s complaint does not provide Colton enough information to participate in resolution session, voluntary mediation, or prepare for a hearing.
MEDIATOR ASSISTANCE FOR NON-REPRESENTED PARENTS: A parent who is not represented by an attorney may ask OAH to provide a mediator to help parent identify the issues and proposed resolutions that must be included in a complaint. (Ed. Code, § 56505.) Parents are encouraged to contact OAH for assistance if they intend to amend their due process hearing request.
ORDER
1. Student’s 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).
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.
If Student files an amended complaint, OAH will issue a Scheduling Order which will restart the timelines for a due process hearing.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the complaint will be
dismissed.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
DATE: April 09, 2019
TED MANN
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings