California OAH special education order · May 14, 2020
Order Denying Request for Continuance
OAH Case No. 2020020241 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH denied the parties' joint continuance request because District counsel's claimed conflict with another expedited hearing was only conjecture, since a pending motion to unexpedite could eliminate it.
This case went to decision
Student v. Santa Paula Unified School District: Santa Paula Unified's manifestation determination reversed because the team considered only the student's learning disability label and skipped the implementation question. (2020)
Summary
Student and Los Angeles Unified School District jointly asked OAH to continue the May 27–28, 2020 hearing. They said District's counsel had a conflict with an expedited hearing set for the same dates in another case. OAH denied the request and confirmed all dates. It found the conflict speculative because the district in the other case had just moved to unexpedite it, which would remove the conflict. OAH also noted a prior continuance, a mediation that Student's counsel cancelled, and its concern that the parties were not ready for hearing, but allowed a renewed request if the motion to unexpedite is denied.
Why it matters
Even a joint, stipulated continuance request can be denied when the claimed conflict is speculative, especially after earlier continuances and a cancelled mediation. Parties should be ready to proceed and show a concrete, present conflict.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a) & (c)
- Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (f)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c)
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d)
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.
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020020241
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE
MAY 14, 2020
On May 14, 2020, the parties filed a joint request with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, to continue this matter, based upon conflict that counsel for Los Angeles Unified School District has with an expedited hearing scheduled for the same dates, May 27 and 28, 2020, in OAH Case Number 2020050048. On March 24, 2020, OAH granted the parties’ prior continuance, which set the current hearing dates so the parties could mediate on April 28, 2020, which Student’s counsel cancelled on April 27, 2020.
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 the potential conflict with the expedited hearing in OAH Case Number 2020050048 is conjecture at this moment, especial as the school district in that matter just filed a motion to unexpedite, which if granted would remove any conflict. OAH has the concern that the parties in this case are not ready to proceed to hearing, especially as the law firm representing Los Angeles Unified School District has filed numerous motions objecting to the videoconference hearing process that OAH has established due to the COVID-19 pandemic, especially as the parties request hearing dates in late-August 2020. If OAH denies the motion to unexpedite in OAH Case Number 2020050048, the parties may file a renewed continuance request.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Peter Paul Castillo Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings