California OAH special education order · September 30, 2020
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss Complaint
OAH Case No. 2020090678 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH denied Parents' motion to dismiss Anaheim Elementary's complaint. The district had properly mailed the complaint, Parents never served the district's attorney, and factual disputes about assessment access need a hearing.
This case went to decision
Anaheim Elementary School District v. Student: Anaheim Elementary may assess a six-year-old in person without parental consent or conditions, but no physical exam without consent. (2020)
Summary
Parents moved to dismiss Anaheim Elementary's due process complaint, arguing the district never served them with it. They also filed an objection to the district's prehearing conference statement, but served neither filing on the district's attorney. OAH found the district had properly mailed the complaint to the same address Parents listed in their own motion. It denied the motion because Parents failed to serve the district's counsel, and because special education law has no summary judgment procedure. Factual disputes over whether Parents made Student available for assessment must be decided at an evidentiary hearing.
Why it matters
Parents must serve every motion on the other side's attorney, or OAH may deny it on that ground alone. Motions to dismiss succeed only for claims plainly outside OAH's jurisdiction, not for disputed facts like whether a family blocked assessments.
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:
ANAHEIM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT,
v.
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020090678
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
SEPTEMBER 30, 2020
On September 29, 2020, Parents on behalf of Student filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, a motion to dismiss Anaheim Elementary School District’s Request for Due Process Hearing, called a complaint. On the same day, Student filed an objection to Anaheim Elementary’s prehearing conference statement in support of his motion to dismiss. Student did not serve Anaheim Elementary’s attorney the motion to dismiss and the objection to Anaheim Elementary’s prehearing conference statement. On September 30, 2020, Anaheim Elementary filed an opposition to the motion.
Student contends Anaheim Elementary failed to serve Parents with a copy of the complaint, and therefore, the complaint should be dismissed. However, Anaheim Elementary served Parents a copy of the complaint by United States mail on September 21, 2020, at the same address Parents listed as their address in Student’s motion to dismiss. Therefore, Anaheim Elementary properly served Parents a copy of the complaint.
In addition, due process requires notice and an opportunity to be heard. Any documents filed with OAH requesting an action must be served on the opposing party’s attorney if the party is represented by counsel. Here, Anaheim Elementary’s complaint specifically requested that its attorney receive all communications regarding this matter.
Student failed to properly serve Anaheim Elementary’s attorney, and therefore, the motion to dismiss and any motions raised in Student’s objection to Anaheim Elementary’s prehearing conference statement is denied on those grounds.
Furthermore, although OAH will grant motions to dismiss allegations that are facially outside of OAH’s jurisdiction such as civil rights claims, section 504 claims, enforcement of settlement agreements, or incorrect parties, special education law does not provide for a summary judgment procedure. Here, the motion to dismiss is not limited to matters that are facially outside of OAH’s jurisdiction. Factual disputes exist as to whether Parents failed to make Student available to Anaheim Elementary for assessments and impeded Anaheim Elementary’s ability to assess him. A determination of these factual disputes requires an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied. All dates currently set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Rommel P. Cruz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings