California OAH special education order · May 5, 2022

Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Issue 4

OAH Case No. 2022040227 · ALJ Alexa Hohensee

OAH dismissed Student's Issue 4, which alleged violations of Section 504, the ADA, and other civil rights laws, because OAH lacks jurisdiction over those claims.

This case went to decision

Student v. Stanislaus Union School District: Stanislaus Union must reimburse $7,087.50 for an independent evaluation and train staff after failing to give prior written notice; other claims denied. (2022)

Summary

Stanislaus moved to dismiss Issue 4 of Student's due process complaint, which alleged that the district violated Section 504, the ADA, and other civil rights statutes. Student did not respond, and a footnote in the complaint acknowledged that the issue was raised to exhaust remedies that federal court may require. OAH granted the motion because its jurisdiction is limited to the identification, evaluation, educational placement, and provision of a free appropriate public education. The case will proceed as scheduled on the remaining issues.

Why it matters

Parents may include Section 504 and ADA claims in an OAH complaint to show exhaustion for a later federal lawsuit, but they should expect OAH to dismiss those claims and plan to pursue them in court.

Key authority cited

  • 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6)
  • Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a)
  • Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 223 F.3d 1026
  • 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.
  • 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.
  • Civ. Code, § 51

Topics

section 504 ada civil rights claims jurisdiction exhaustion motion to dismiss

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.

STANISLAUS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT.

OAH CASE NUMBER 2022040227

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS ISSUE 4

MAY 5, 2022

On April 6, 2022, Parents on behalf of Student filed a request for due process hearing, referred to as a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming Stanislaus Union School District. The Office or Administrative Hearings is referred to as

OAH.

On April 28, 2022, Stanislaus filed a motion to dismiss Student’s Issue 4 because OAH lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim in Issue 4. OAH received no response from Student.

The purpose of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1400 et.

seq.) is to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education, and to protect the rights of those children and their parents. (20 U.S.C. § 1400(d)(1)(A), (B), and (C); see also Ed. Code, § 56000.) A party has the right to present a complaint with respect to any matter relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to such child. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6); Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a).) The jurisdiction of OAH is limited to these matters. (Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified School. Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 223 F.3d 1026, 1028-1029.)

OAH does not have jurisdiction to decide claims based on Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.), called Section 504, Section 1983 of Title 42 United States Code, the Americans with Disability Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 1201, et seq.), called the ADA, the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51), or other civil rights laws.

Student alleges at Issue 4 that Stanislaus’s actions and inactions violated Section 504, the ADA, and other civil rights statutes. In a footnote to Issue 4, Student acknowledges that Issue 4 is brought to exhaust remedies as may be required by federal court.

OAH does not have jurisdiction to resolve claims brought under Section 504, the ADA, or any federal or State civil rights statutes. Accordingly, Issue 4 of Student’s complaint is dismissed.

ORDER

1. Stanislaus’s Motion to Dismiss is granted.

2. Issue 4 of Student’s complaint is dismissed. The matter will proceed as

scheduled as to the remaining issues.

Alexa Hohensee Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings