California OAH special education order · June 9, 2020
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2020060095 · ALJ Rita Defilippis
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient, rejecting Trinity Alps' argument that it lacked a timeframe and supporting facts, because it described the improper-graduation issue well enough for the district to respond.
Summary
Trinity Alps filed a Notice of Insufficiency arguing that Student's complaint did not give a specific timeframe and did not state facts showing Student was failing classes or how the district failed to fix the problem. Student alleged that Trinity Alps graduated him in June 2018 despite knowing he had severe depression, failing grades, and did not meet graduation standards, in order to get rid of him because of his disability. OAH found the complaint sufficient because it identified the issue and gave enough facts for the district to respond and take part in a resolution session and mediation. All dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
OAH reads complaints liberally. A complaint that clearly names the problem and the key facts, such as an improper graduation in a stated month and year, can survive a district's insufficiency challenge without detailed proof.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 FR 46,540-46541, 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.
TRINITY ALPS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020060095
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY OF DUE
PROCESS COMPLAINT
JUNE 9, 2020
On May 29, 2020, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Trinity Alps Unified School District. On June 8, 2020, Trinity Alps 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 alleges one issue in his complaint. Specifically, that Trinity Alps graduated him in June 2018 despite its awareness that he suffered from severe depression, had failing grades, and did not meet the standards required for graduation.
Instead of remedying the situation, Student alleges that Trinity Alps graduated him to “rid themselves of him because of his disability”. Student brings the complaint to exhaust administrative remedies under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to remedy his lack of qualifications to graduate.
Trinity Alps contends that Student’s complaint is insufficient because it fails to identify a specific timeframe for the alleged problem. Trinity Alps also contends that Student failed to state facts to support his claim that he was failing his classes and to establish how Trinity Alps failed to remedy the situation.
The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient. Student’s complaint identifies the issue and adequate facts about the problem to permit Trinity Alps to respond and participate in a resolution session and mediation. Therefore, Student’s due process complaint is sufficient.
ORDER
1. The complaint is sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Rita Defilippis Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings