California OAH special education order · October 29, 2019
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Insufficient
OAH Case No. 2019090001 · ALJ Tara Doss
OAH found Student's amended complaint insufficient as to Sunnyvale only, because every issue, fact, and proposed resolution concerned Discovery Charter and Santa Clara, giving Sunnyvale no notice of any claim against it.
This case went to decision
Student v. Santa Clara County Office of Education et al.: Discovery Charter School II and Santa Clara County Office of Education were not the responsible LEA after the student's private placement and settlement. (2020)
Summary
Student added Sunnyvale School District as a party in an amended complaint, and Sunnyvale filed a notice of insufficiency. OAH held that the amended complaint's four issues, facts, and proposed resolutions related only to Discovery Charter and Santa Clara County Office of Education. It did not allege that Sunnyvale failed to identify, evaluate, or offer Student a free appropriate public education. Student was given 14 days to file a second amended complaint, or the case will be dismissed as to Sunnyvale only, and all scheduled dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
Adding a district to the caption is not enough. Each named agency must be tied to specific issues, facts, and remedies, or that agency can be dropped from the case.
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)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185 (2003)
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 Fed. Reg. 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,
v.
SANTA CLARA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION, DISCOVERY
CHARTER SCHOOL 2, AND SUNNYVALE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2019090001
ORDER DETERMINING DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT INSUFFICIENT
On August 30, 2019, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Santa Clara County Office of Education and Discovery Charter School 2. On October 11, 2019, Student filed an amended complaint in order to add Sunnyvale School District as a party. On October 25, 2019, Sunnyvale filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties have the right to challenge the complaint’s sufficiency.
(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: (1) describes the problem relating to the proposed change regarding the Student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing the Student a free appropriate public education; (2) includes facts about the problem; and (3) includes a proposed resolution 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 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 amended complaint is insufficiently pled as to Sunnyvale. The amended complaint has four issues, detailed facts supporting the issues, and proposed resolutions. However, on the face of the complaint, the issues, facts, and proposed resolutions only relate to Discovery Charter and Santa Clara. The amended complaint does not allege Sunnyvale failed to identify, evaluate, or offer Student a free appropriate public education. Therefore, the amended complaint fails to give Sunnyvale notice of the issues being alleged against it.
ORDER
1. Student’s amended complaint is insufficiently pled, as to Sunnyvale only,
under section title 20 United States Code 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student may file a second amended complaint under title 20 United States
Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).
3. The second amended complaint must comply with the requirements of title
20 U.S.C. section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and must be filed no later than 14 days from the date of this Order.
4. If Student fails to file a timely second amended complaint, the complaint will
be dismissed, as to Sunnyvale only.
5. All dates currently scheduled in the case are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 29, 2019 Tara Doss Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings