California OAH special education order · December 2, 2021
Order Denying Motion for Preliminary Hearing
OAH Case No. 2021090903 · ALJ Penelope S. Pahl
OAH denied Riverside's request for a preliminary hearing on the law and standard of proof for COVID-era distance learning claims. The usual IDEA and California law and the preponderance standard apply, as in any case.
This case went to decision
Student v. Riverside Unified School District: Riverside Unified must provide 211 compensatory hours and staff training for distance learning failures and missing occupational therapy consultation. (2022)
Summary
Riverside asked OAH to hold a preliminary hearing to decide the standard of proof, the controlling law, and what evidence would be relevant. Riverside argued that a district should not be liable for failing to deliver IEP services while schools were closed during the COVID-19 pandemic. OAH did not consider Student's opposition because it was sent only through the secure filing system and never served on Riverside. The ALJ denied the motion, ruling that this case is governed by the same IDEA and California special education laws as any other case, that the preponderance of the evidence standard applies, and that relevant, non-cumulative evidence will be admitted under the usual rules.
Why it matters
Districts cannot use a pretrial motion to carve out a special legal standard for pandemic-era FAPE claims; distance learning claims are judged under ordinary IDEA rules. Parties should also remember that uploading a filing through OAH's secure filing system does not serve the other side, so an unserved opposition may be ignored.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
- Ed. Code § 56000 et seq.
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082(b)
- Ed. Code § 56505.1(h)
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.
RIVERSIDE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2021090903
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
DECEMBER 2, 2021
On November 17, 2021, Riverside filed a motion requesting a preliminary hearing to determine the “standard of proof, controlling law and therefore the evidence that will be relevant to the resolution of this Action.” On November 18, 2021, Student filed an opposition to the request for a preliminary hearing. The opposition was not considered as the Office of Administrative Hearings, or OAH, did not receive notice that it was served on Riverside. The proof of service notes only service through the secure filing transmission system or SFT. Transmission through the SFT gives notice only to OAH and does not constitute service on other parties.
The issues in this case involve alleged denials of a free, appropriate public education, or FAPE, to Student from March 2020 through the date of the filing of the request for due process. The issues include allegations that Riverside denied Student a FAPE during distance learning resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic. Riverside asserts, “it appears that Student is seeking to make RUSD responsible for the closure of schools due to a world-wide pandemic caused by the COVID-19 virus and its variants … It would make no sense to hold a school district liable for a violation of federal law, when the school district was not able to provide all of the services and placement called for by an IEP when the school district was closed due to forces beyond its control.” Riverside argues that such a determination would “have a profound effect on the amount and nature of the evidence presented at hearing,” thus, this motion.
A preliminary hearing is not required to determine the standard of proof and controlling law applicable in a special education case. This case does not differ from any other special education case, which is controlled by the Individuals with Disabilities’ Education Act and regulations, and California special education laws and regulations. (20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.; Ed. Code § 56000 et seq.) Nor would the applicable preponderance of the evidence standard of proof be changed. As with any special education hearing, any relevant evidence that is not deemed cumulative will be admitted if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, subject to the Administrative Law Judge’s authority to set a reasonable length of time on the hearing. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082 subd. (b); Education Code, section 56505.1, subdivision (h).)
Riverside’s motion for a preliminary hearing is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Penelope S. Pahl Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings