California OAH special education order · May 6, 2020
Order Denying Request for Continuance
OAH Case No. 2020010533 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH denied a joint continuance request based on Student's attorney's possible conflict with another case, finding the conflict likely to disappear because that other case was about to be amended or consolidated.
This case went to decision
Student v. Newport-Mesa Unified School District (consolidated): Newport-Mesa Unified must reimburse about $50,207 for a year of private school after skipping an annual IEP; other claims denied. (2020)
Summary
The parties jointly asked OAH to continue this District-filed case because Student's attorney had a possible hearing conflict with another OAH case, number 2019120861. OAH denied the request and confirmed all prehearing conference and hearing dates. In the other case, Student's attorney had just filed a motion to amend the complaint, which would reset the timelines if granted. The district in that case had also filed its own complaint, and the parties there sought consolidation, which would lead to a continuance of that case and remove the conflict.
Why it matters
Even a joint request to continue can be denied. OAH will not find good cause based on a counsel scheduling conflict that pending motions in the other case are likely to resolve.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515
- Ed. Code § 56502(f)
- Ed. Code § 56505(f)(3)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332
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:
LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
v.
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020010533
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE
MAY 06, 2020
On May 6, 2020, the parties filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, a joint request to continue this matter, based upon Student’s attorney having a possible conflict with OAH Case Number 2019120861.
A due process hearing must be conducted and a decision rendered within 45 days of receipt of the due process notice unless an extension is granted for good cause. (34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a) & (c) (2006); Ed. Code, §§ 56502, subd. (f), 56505, subd. (f)(3); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020.) As a result, continuances are disfavored.
Good cause may include the unavailability of a party, counsel, or an essential witness due to death, illness or other excusable circumstances; substitution of an attorney when the substitution is required in the interests of justice; a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or another significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for hearing. (Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).)
OAH considers all relevant facts and circumstances, including the proximity of the hearing date; previous continuances or delays; the length of continuance requested; the availability of other means to address the problem giving rise to the request; prejudice to a party or witness as a result of a continuance; the impact of granting a continuance on other pending hearings; whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; whether the parties have stipulated to a continuance; whether the interests of justice are served by the continuance or imposing conditions on the continuance; and any other relevant fact or circumstance. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d).)
OAH has reviewed the request for good cause and considered all relevant facts and circumstances. The request is:
Denied. All prehearing conference and hearing dates are confirmed and shall proceed as calendared. The continuance request is denied as Student’s attorney just filed a motion to amend the complaint in OAH Case Number 2019120861, which would reset the applicable timelines if granted. Further, the school district in that matter just filed its own complaint and the parties seek to consolidate the matters, which would lead to the continuance of OAH Case Number 2019120861, removing any hearing conflict.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Peter Paul Castillo Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings