California OAH special education order · March 9, 2021
Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint and Finding Motion to Quash Moot
OAH Case No. 2020120386 · ALJ Alexa Hohensee
OAH let Student amend the complaint without opposition and found Manhattan Beach's motion to quash moot, because subpoenas issued under the original complaint no longer require production.
Summary
Student moved to amend the complaint to add claims that arose after filing and to include Student's recent autism diagnosis. Manhattan Beach did not oppose. OAH granted the amendment as timely and reset all timelines as of the order date. Manhattan Beach also asked OAH to rule on its pending motion to quash and to modify the subpoenas duces tecum so production would fall on the new hearing date. OAH found the motion to quash moot and denied the modification request, because the subpoenas were issued based on claims in a different complaint.
Why it matters
When a complaint is amended, subpoenas duces tecum issued under the original complaint stop requiring production. Parties need to serve new subpoenas tied to the amended complaint rather than asking OAH to carry the old ones forward.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(ii)
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.
MANHATTAN BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020120386
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT
AND FINDING MOTION TO QUASH MOOT
MARCH 9, 2021
On December 11, 2020, Student filed a due process hearing request, referred to as a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming Manhattan Beach Unified School District. The Office of Administrative Hearings is referred to as OAH. On March 9, 2021, Student filed an amended complaint incorporated with a motion to amend Student’s complaint. Manhattan Beach filed a non-opposition.
An amended complaint may be filed when the other party consents in writing and is given the opportunity to resolve the complaint through a resolution session, or when the hearing officer grants permission. The hearing officer may grant permission at any time more than five days before the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C.
§1415(c)(2)(E)(i).) The filing of an amended complaint restarts the applicable timelines for the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C. §1415(c)(2)(E)(ii).)
Student seeks to amend the complaint to add claims arising after the filing of the original complaint, and to include Student’s recent diagnosis of autism. The motion to amend was filed more than five days prior to the due process hearing. Therefore, it is timely and is granted. The amended complaint shall be deemed filed on the date of this order. All applicable timelines shall be reset as of the date of this order. OAH will issue a scheduling order with the new dates.
Manhattan Beach requests in its non-opposition that OAH rule on the pending motion to quash and modify the subpoenas duces tecum issued in this matter to require production on the new hearing date. However, as the subpoenas duces tecum were issued based on claims in a different complaint, the motion to quash is moot and production is no longer required under the previously served subpoenas duces tecum.
No order will issue on the motion to quash, and Manhattan Beach’s request for modification of the subpoenas duces tecum is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Alexa Hohensee Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings