California OAH special education order · June 2, 2022
Order Granting Peremptory Challenge
OAH Case No. 2022030687, 2022040604 · ALJ Joy Redmon
OAH granted Los Angeles's peremptory challenge to ALJ Penelope Pahl as timely, because she was assigned after the prehearing conference, but refused its request to reassign the case to ALJ Ravandi.
This case went to decision
Student v. Los Angeles Unified School District (consolidated): Los Angeles Unified must fund 450 tutoring hours and return a student to a public special day class after an improper virtual placement. (2022)
Summary
Los Angeles filed a peremptory challenge to ALJ Penelope Pahl one day after she was assigned to the due process hearing. Normally a challenge must be made by the start of the prehearing conference if an ALJ is already assigned then. ALJ Pahl was assigned after the prehearing conference, and the parties were told of the change on June 1, 2022, so the challenge was timely and was granted. OAH denied Los Angeles's request to send the case to ALJ Ravandi, who had conducted the prehearing conference, and assigned ALJ Charles Marson instead.
Why it matters
Each party gets one peremptory challenge to an assigned ALJ, and the deadline depends on when the ALJ was assigned. A party can remove an ALJ this way but cannot choose who replaces them.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11425.40, subds. (a), (d)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1034
People named in the order
- Penelope Pahl, Administrative Law Judge (challenged)
- Ravandi, Administrative Law Judge who conducted the prehearing conference
- Charles Marson, Administrative Law Judge newly assigned to the hearing
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 MATTERS OF:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
AND
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBERS 2022030687 AND 2022040604
ORDER GRANTING PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE
JUNE 2, 2022
On June 1, 2022, Los Angeles filed a notice of peremptory challenge to Administrative Law Judge Penelope Pahl in the above captioned matter. Los Angeles’s peremptory challenge is made pursuant to Government Code section 11425.40, subdivision (d), of the Administrative Procedures Act, and California Code of Regulations, title 1, section 1034.
Government Code section 11425.40, subdivision (d), establishes the criteria for disqualification of the presiding officer. A party is entitled to one peremptory challenge (disqualification without cause) to an ALJ assigned to an Office of Administrative Hearings hearing. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1034, subds. (a) & (b); Gov. Code, § 11425.40, subd. (d).) In no event will a peremptory challenge be allowed if it is made after the hearing has commenced. In addition, if at the time of a scheduled prehearing conference, an ALJ has been assigned to the hearing, any challenge to the assigned ALJ shall be made no later than commencement of that prehearing conference. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1034, subd. (c).) A peremptory challenge is not allowed on reconsideration or remand. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1034, subd. (a).)
Due to OAH’s operational need, ALJ Pahl was assigned after the prehearing conference. The external calendar was updated on June 1, 2022, and a courtesy telephone call was made to the parties that day giving notification of the changed assignment. Accordingly, the peremptory challenge is timely made and is granted pursuant to Government section 11425.40, subdivisions (a) and (d), and California Code of Regulations, title 1, section 1034, subdivision (c). Los Angeles asked that the matter be reassigned to ALJ Ravandi, who conducted the prehearing conference. That request cannot be accommodated. The matter is now assigned to ALJ Charles Marson for the due process hearing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Joy Redmon Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings