California OAH special education order · May 24, 2022
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2022050681 · ALJ Tiffany Gilmartin
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient, rejecting Irvine's challenge to a failure-to-assess claim, because alleging Irvine did not comprehensively assess Student over three named school years gave adequate notice.
Summary
Irvine challenged the sufficiency of Student's due process complaint. It argued that Issue One, failure to assess, was overly broad because it did not say which assessments were at issue or which areas of need were missed. OAH held that the IDEA's liberal pleading standard only requires an awareness and understanding of the issues. Student's allegation that Irvine failed to comprehensively assess Student during the 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022 school years told Irvine the nature and time frame of the claim, so the complaint was sufficient and all dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A failure-to-assess claim can survive a sufficiency challenge without listing specific assessments or areas of need, as long as it states the problem and the time frame. Districts cannot use a sufficiency notice to demand detailed pleading.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(C)
- Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (d)(1)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699
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.
IRVINE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2022050681
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY OF DUE
PROCESS COMPLAINT
MAY 24, 2022
On May 19, 2022, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Irvine Unified School District. On May 23, 2022, Irvine filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties have the right to challenge the complaint’s sufficiency.
(20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
The complaint is deemed sufficient unless a party notifies OAH and the other party in writing within 15 days of receiving the complaint that the party believes the complaint has not met the notice requirements. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(C); Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (d)(1).)
A complaint is sufficient if it: (1) describes the problem relating to the proposed change regarding the Student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing the Student a free appropriate public education; (2) includes facts about the problem; and (3) includes a proposed resolution to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. (See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess.
(2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.)
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108- 185, supra, at p. 34.) The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept.
10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. Opn.]; Escambia County Bd. Of Educ. V. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd. (M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. Opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. Of Educ. (3d Cir.
2009) 306 Fed.Appx. 772, 775 [nonpub. Opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. Of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
Irvine contends Issue One is overly broad as it fails to discuss how Irvine failed to assess in all areas of Student need, which assessments are at issue, and how Irvine failed to assess him in and additional areas. However, this is not the pleading requirement. The liberal pleading standard of the IDEA requires only enough information to provide “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” Here, Student alleges Irvine failed to comprehensively assess Student during school years 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022. Irvine is aware of the nature and the time frame of the allegation. This is sufficient information to participate in the resolution process, mediation, and prepare for due process hearing.
ORDER
1. The complaint is sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Tiffany Gilmartin Tiffany Gilmartin Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings