California OAH special education order · September 3, 2021
Order Denying Motion to Consolidate
OAH Case No. 2021040393 · ALJ Marlo Nisperos
OAH denied Student's motion to add a new case to an already consolidated case because the claims share no common question of law or fact and the time periods barely overlap.
This case went to decision
Student v. Enterprise Elementary School District (consolidated): Enterprise Elementary must fund 104 hours of in-home services and a health IEE after its virtual-only offer denied FAPE. (2022)
Summary
After the prehearing conference, Student filed a new due process complaint and asked OAH to consolidate it with an existing consolidated case between Student and Enterprise. Enterprise opposed. The existing case covers April 9, 2019 to May 19, 2021. The new case alleges an assessment was not finished in time for a June 2, 2021 IEP meeting. OAH found no common question of law or fact, little overlap in time periods, and a risk that adding a third matter would bring in new witnesses and evidence and delay a case pending since February, so judicial economy would not be served.
Why it matters
Filing a new claim after the prehearing conference and trying to fold it into a pending hearing will likely fail if it covers a different time period and needs different evidence. Families should raise all known claims early, for example by amending, rather than counting on late consolidation.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11507.3, subd. (a)
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a)
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:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
ENTERPRISE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2021040393
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE
SEPTEMBER 3, 2021
On February 18, 2021, Enterprise Elementary School District filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2021020664, naming Student. On March 22, 2021, Enterprise’s motion to amend the complaint was granted.
On April 9, 2021, Student filed a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2021040393, naming Enterprise. These matters were consolidated on April 15, 2021, in OAH case number 2021040393. On May 19, 2021, Student’s motion to amend its complaint in the consolidated case was granted. A prehearing conference was held on August 27, 2021, in the consolidated case.
On August 27, 2021, after the prehearing conference in the consolidated case, Student filed a Request for Due Process Hearing in OAH case number 2021080836, Student’s case, naming Enterprise.
On August 27, 2021, Student filed a Motion to Consolidate the consolidated case with Student’s Case.
On September 3, 2021 Enterprise filed an opposition.
CONSOLIDATION
No statute or regulation specifically provides a standard to be applied in deciding a motion to consolidate special education cases. However, OAH will generally consolidate matters that involve the same parties, a common question of law and/or fact, and when consolidation of the matters furthers the interests of judicial economy by saving time or preventing inconsistent rulings. (See Gov. Code, § 11507.3, subd. (a)
[administrative proceedings may be consolidated if they involve a common question of law or fact]; Code of Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (a) [same applies to civil cases].)
Here, the consolidated case and Student’s case do not involve a common question of law or fact. If the motion were granted, it would expand the due process hearing with different witnesses and evidence. The time period at issue in the consolidated case is between April 9, 2019 and May 19, 2021, and the allegation in Student’s case alleges that at an IEP team meeting scheduled for June 2, 2021, an assessment was not timely completed. There is little to no overlap of the time period at issue between the consolidated matter and Student’s case. Granting Student’s motion would consolidate three matters for hearing and further complicate and delay adjudication of the matter that has been pending since February. OAH may exercise discretion when granting motions to consolidate. Although the matters involve the same parties, judicial economy would not be served by consolidating these matters.
ORDER
Student’s Motion to Consolidate is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Marlo Nisperos Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings