California OAH special education order · September 20, 2022
Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference and Order Denying Stockton Unified School District's Request for Continuance and Granting Request to Go Dark
OAH Case No. 2022080176 · ALJ Jennifer Kelly
OAH denied Stockton's one-week continuance request over Student's opposition, because district counsel knew of her conference conflict in August but never told Student's counsel. OAH instead delayed one hearing day's start.
This case went to decision
Student v. Stockton Unified School District: Stockton Unified owes 186 compensatory hours, a speech IEE, and staff training for deficient IEPs and IEP meetings held without parents. (2022)
Summary
Stockton asked to continue the due process hearing by one week because its attorney was presenting at a conference on the morning of September 28, 2022. Student opposed, arguing Stockton had not shown good cause. The ALJ noted that counsel had known of the conflict since August but had not told Student's counsel or tried to meet and confer. The hearing was kept on its September 27, 2022 start date, with a 1:00 p.m. start on September 28 and no hearing on October 4 (Yom Kippur). The order also sets 4 issues on Stockton's distance learning and the August 2020 and October 2021 IEPs for an 8-day videoconference hearing, and it sets exhibit, witness, and meet-and-confer deadlines.
Why it matters
Continuances are disfavored in special education cases, and an attorney's known scheduling conflict that was not raised early with the other side is unlikely to justify delay. A narrow fix, such as a late start on one day, is more likely to be granted.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332
- J.W. v. Fresno Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431
- Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49
- M.C. v. Antelope Valley Union High School Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189
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.
STOCKTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2022080176
ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING CONFERENCE FOR
HEARING BY VIDEOCONFERENCE AND ORDER DENYING
STOCKTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT’S REQUEST FOR
CONTINUANCE AND GRANTING REQUEST TO GO DARK
SEPTEMBER 20, 2022
On September 19, 2022, Administrative Law Judge Jennifer Kelly, Office of Administrative Hearings, held a prehearing conference by videoconference. The Administrative Law Judge is called an ALJ. The Office of Administrative Hearings is called OAH. The prehearing conference is called a PHC.
Sheila Bayne, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Student. Kate S. Im, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Stockton Unified School District, called Stockton.
HEARING DATES, TIMES, AND LOCATION
STOCKTON’S MOTION TO CONTINUE
On September 14, 2022, Stockton filed a motion to continue the due process by one week. The basis of Stockton’s motion was Attorney Im’s unavailability during the morning of September 28, 2022 based upon a scheduling conflict. More particularly, Attorney Im is presenting at the Association of California School Administrators. On September 16, 2022, Student filed an opposition to Stockton’s motion to continue on the basis Stockton did not establish good cause for the continuance request.
A due process hearing must be conducted, and a decision rendered within 45 days of receipt of the due process notice unless an extension is granted for good cause. (34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a) & (c) (2006); Ed. Code, §§ 56502, subd. (f), 56505, subd. (f)(3); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020.) As a result, continuances are disfavored.
Good cause may include the unavailability of a party, counsel, or an essential witness due to death, illness, or other excusable circumstances; substitution of an attorney when the substitution is required in the interests of justice; a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or another significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for hearing. (Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).)
OAH considers all relevant facts and circumstances, including the proximity of the hearing date; previous continuances or delays; the length of continuance requested; the availability of other means to address the problem giving rise to the request; prejudice to a party or witness as a result of a continuance; the impact of granting a continuance on other pending hearings; whether trial counsel is engaged in another trial; whether the parties have stipulated to a continuance; whether the interests of justice are served by the continuance or imposing conditions on the continuance; and any other relevant fact or circumstance. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d).)
Counsel for Stockton advised the ALJ she was aware of her participation at the conference sometime during the month of August, 2022 but did not communicate this to Student’s counsel or attempt to meet and confer regarding a continuance of the due process hearing. After further discussion and agreement by the parties, the ALJ ordered the due process hearing to commence as currently scheduled on September 27, 2022.
To accommodate Attorney Im’s scheduling conflict, the hearing will commence at 1:00 pm on September 28, 2022 and continue day to day thereafter at the discretion of the
ALJ.
DUE PROCESS HEARING
The hearing will take place on September 27, 28, and 29, 2022, and continue day to day at the discretion of the ALJ. The hearing shall begin at 9:30 AM each day and generally end at 3:30 PM, unless otherwise ordered. As stated above, the hearing will commence at 1:00 pm on September 28, 2022. The parties anticipate it will take 8 days to complete the hearing. Additional hearing dates will be discussed with the ALJ during the hearing. Further, if the hearing is not completed the week of September 27, 2022, any continued hearing date shall not be set on October 4, 2022, the date of Yom Kippur.
HEARING LOCATION
OAH is authorized to conduct due process hearings by videoconference or telephone. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) OAH will conduct the due process hearing by videoconference using the Zoom application. Unless otherwise ordered, participants are required to appear by videoconference using computer or device with video capability and Zoom.
The parties shall immediately notify all potential witnesses of the hearing dates and shall subpoena witnesses, if necessary, to ensure that the witnesses will appear to testify. A party’s failure to notify or subpoena a witness to testify will not be considered good cause to continue the hearing. Instructions for issuing and responding to subpoenas and optional forms for subpoenas can be found on the website at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OAH/Case-Types/Special- Education/Forms/Subpoenas?search=special%20education%20subpoena.
ISSUES AND PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
A free appropriate public education is called FAPE. An individualized education program is called an IEP. The issues at the due process hearing, and proposed resolutions, as alleged in the complaint and clarified by the parties and the ALJ during the PHC are:
ISSUES
1. Did Stockton deny Student a FAPE, during the 2020-2021 school year by:
a. assigning Student to distance learning and failing to provide in-
person services;
b. failing to assess Student to ensure he could obtain a FAPE during
distance learning; and
c. failing to provide Student with necessary accommodations during
distance learning to ensure Student could receive a FAPE?
2. Did Stockton deny Student a FAPE in the August 27, 2020 IEP, by:
a. convening the IEP team meeting without Parents;
b. failing to develop adequate goals to address all of Student’s areas
of need;
c. failing to offer sufficient intensive individual services in the form of
a one-to-one aide;
d. failing to offer sufficient speech and language services;
e. failing to offer extended school year services to prevent Student’s
regression;
f. failing to offer Parents training to address Student’s needs arising
from autism;
g. failing to offer at home and clinic-based Applied Behavior Analysis
therapy;
h. predetermining Student’s offer of placement and services; and
i. failing to offer Student a sufficient program and supports necessary for Student to receive an educational benefit?
3. Did Stockton deny Student a FAPE in the October 29, 2021 IEP by:
a. convening the IEP team meeting without Parents;
b. failing to develop adequate goals to address all of Student’s areas
of need;
c. failing to offer sufficient intensive individual services in the form of
a one-to-one aide;
d. failing to offer sufficient speech and language services;
e. failing to offer extended school year services to prevent Student’s
regression;
f. failing to offer Parents training to address Student’s needs arising
from autism;
g. failing to offer at home and clinic-based Applied Behavior Analysis
therapy;
h. predetermining Student’s offer of placement and services; and
i. failing to offer a sufficient program and supports necessary for Student to receive an educational benefit?
4. Did Stockton deny Student a FAPE in the August 27, 2020 and October 29,
2021 IEPs by failing to collect accurate and complete data on Student’s goal progress, particularly during the period of distance learning? Student’s Issues were reframed for clarity. The ALJ has authority to rephrase a party’s issues, so long as no substantive changes are made. (J.W. v. Fresno Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431, 442-443.) A party must immediately file a written request for relief if the Issues as stated in this Order do not reflect their understanding of the Issues as clarified at the PHC.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
The resolutions requested by Student include a decision finding Student the prevailing party on all issues and directing Stockton to reimburse Parent for all educational costs incurred; fund compensatory education; fund independent educational evaluations at public expense in the areas of functional behavior and psychoeducational; and provide Student a one-to-one aide at school and tutoring if in- person instruction is not offered to Student. Student also requests Stockton be directed to provide Parent training, develop new goals for Student in all areas of need and to accurately report Student's progress on progress reports.
Stockton filed its response to Student’s complaint on August 15, 2022. (M.C. v.
Antelope Valley Union High School Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189, 1199-1200.)
EXHIBITS
The parties shall serve their exhibits on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). The parties shall upload their exhibits electronically according to the Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically.
Timely uploading electronic hearing exhibits five business days before the first day of hearing constitutes that party’s timely exchange of evidence in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7).
Except for good cause shown, or unless used solely for rebuttal or impeachment, any exhibit not timely exchanged as required by Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7) shall not be admitted into evidence at the hearing unless the ALJ rules that it is admissible.
IDENTIFYING EXHIBITS AND PAGE NUMBERS
Each exhibit must be identified by a letter and number. Student must use the letter S before the number to identify Student’s exhibits. Stockton must use the letter D before the number to identify Stockton’s exhibits. For example, S-1 means Student’s exhibit 1 and D-1 means Stockton’s exhibit 1. A cover sheet with this identifying letter and number should be the first page of each exhibit. The electronic evidence program will automatically number the exhibits and additional page numbering or bates stamping should not be added.
CONTENT
Each exhibit must consist of one document. Separate documents may not be combined into one exhibit. Emails or letters may be consolidated into one exhibit if they are part of a single chain of messages. Exhibits should be in chronological order.
Parties should include resumes or curriculum vitae for each witness expected to testify as an expert.
Stockton’s exhibits must include a copy of the school calendar for each school year in question.
Electronic copies of exhibits filed with OAH shall be filed by 5:00 PM at least five business days before the first day of hearing. Please refer to the General Order OAH issued with the Scheduling Order that contains the Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically. It includes instructions for how to file exhibits electronically.
Beginning three business days before the hearing, the electronic evidence system will not allow parties to upload exhibits unless permitted by the ALJ during the hearing at the ALJ’s discretion.
WITNESSES
The parties shall serve their list of witnesses on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505. No party shall be permitted to call any witnesses not timely disclosed except for good cause shown, supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and at the discretion of the ALJ.
Parties are responsible for ensuring that all participants are familiar with and follow the Instructions for Joining the Online Due Process Hearing provided with this Order. Participants who have not previously used the Zoom application, may find informative instructions on at by visiting, Getting Started with Zoom at https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/categories/200101697.
The parties are responsible for ensuring that witnesses join the virtual hearing room at the designated date and time to testify. Witnesses are required to join the due process hearing by computer and appear by videoconference unless they do not have the necessary computer equipment. If a witness does not have the necessary equipment, the ALJ may permit the witnesses to appear by audio only or by telephone.
“Audio only” means using a computer without video. A witness’s inability to attend the hearing by videoconference will be discussed at the start of the hearing.
The parties are responsible for producing their own witnesses unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ. Parties shall make witnesses under their control reasonably available. The parties must schedule their witnesses to avoid delays in the hearing and to minimize or eliminate the need for calling witnesses out of order.
The ALJ has discretion to limit the number of witnesses and the time allowed for testimony. Education Code, section 56505.1, subdivision (h), empowers the ALJ to set a reasonable limit on the length of the hearing after consideration of four factors. The first two factors are the issues to be heard and the complexity of facts to be proven. The second two factors are the ability of the parties or their representatives to present their respective cases and the parties’ estimates of the time needed to present their cases.
MEET AND CONFER
The parties are encouraged to review and shorten their witness and exhibit lists before the hearing. Evidence may be excluded if it is repetitive, cumulative, or insufficiently probative to justify the time it would take to hear.
The parties are ordered to meet and confer no later than September 23, 2022 by 5:00 pm to discuss scheduling witnesses and how much time each witness will take. The parties shall discuss any issues related to counsel and witnesses appearing by videoconference for hearing, electronically viewing exhibits during the hearing, and subpoenas, if any. The parties should attempt to eliminate duplicate exhibits from their hearing exhibits. The parties shall discuss whether they can produce a written stipulation as to pertinent facts, contentions, resolutions and the authenticity and admissibility of documents to shorten the length of time needed for the hearing.
As part of the meet and confer process, Stockton shall inform Student which proposed witnesses are district employees. Stockton shall also identify the witnesses on Student’s list that require a subpoena. Stockton may agree to accept service for a witness under Stockton’s control or provide Student with the witness’s most recent contact information.
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FORM
Both parties have an ongoing obligation to ensure that OAH has current information on the Participant Information Form filed with OAH and shall file an updated Form, as necessary. The Participant Information Form is not served upon the opposing party. The ongoing obligation to ensure that the Participant Information Form filed with OAH is current does not change the parties’ statutory obligation to timely disclose their witnesses to the other party at least five business days prior to hearing.
The parties must file an updated Participant Information Form to inform OAH of any changes, additions, or deletions, including the required information no later than 5:00 PM at least two business days before the first day of hearing.
Any contact information provided shall be used for the limited purpose of issuing subpoenas or for contacting a witness to attend the hearing. Any contact information shall not be disclosed to any other person.
EVIDENCE PRESENTATION
In an administrative proceeding, the burden of proof is ordinarily on the party requesting the hearing. (Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49, 62.) In this case, Student requested the hearing and bears the burden of proof. Student’s case-in-chief shall be presented first, followed by Stockton.
WITNESS LISTS
The parties must provide a joint proposed witness list to the ALJ on the first day of hearing. The list should include the first and last name of the witness, which party is calling the witness to testify, and include dates and time estimates of each witness’s expected testimony. In the event an agreement cannot be reached, each party shall prepare a separate written list. Student must have witnesses available in case there is no agreement.
At the beginning of the hearing, the ALJ and the parties will discuss the length of time anticipated for each witness and scheduling issues for individual witnesses. The ALJ will finalize the witness schedule. Parties must be prepared at the end of each day to discuss the witnesses to be presented the next day and the estimated time for the testimony of each witness.
SCOPE OF WITNESS EXAMINATION
Each witness will be called to testify only once, except for rebuttal purposes. All parties must examine a witness on all issues when the witness is first called to testify.
Requiring a witness to appear only once takes priority over the order in which parties present their case-in-chief.
AUDIO ONLY OR TELEPHONIC TESTIMONY
Whether a witness may appear by audio only or telephone instead of videoconference is a matter within the discretion of the ALJ. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) Any party seeking to present a witness by audio only or telephone shall request permission to do so before the hearing. Any party seeking to present a witness who cannot access exhibits electronically must inform the ALJ at the beginning of the hearing.
ELECTRONIC RECORDINGS
AUDIO RECORDING
A party may request permission to make an audio recording of the hearing.
Permission to make an audio recording is subject to the ALJ’s discretion and based upon the following conditions:
1. the OAH recording is the only official recording;
2. the parties shall turn their recording device on and off at the same time
that the ALJ is on and off the record to avoid recording conversations while off the record;
3. operation of the party’s recording mechanism will not be allowed to delay
the hearing;
4. a party’s recording may not be given, provided, or played to a witness, or
potential witness;
5. the recording is subject to the same confidentiality as the due process
hearing; and
6. participants shall not take screenshots of the videoconference nor share or
publish any portion of the videoconference or audio recording.
Student’s and Stockton’s request to make an audio recording of the hearing is granted.
VIDEO RECORDING
No party, witness, or anyone else may videorecord any part of the proceedings or stream live through any means.
RECORDINGS AS EXHIBITS
Recordings may not be uploaded electronically without the ALJ’s permission. The ALJ has discretion to admit or exclude evidence in the form of a recording. Any request to submit a recording shall be considered at the time of hearing.
The ALJ may grant or deny the request or grant the request subject to certain conditions. The party offering the recording must establish that all or a part of the recording is relevant. The ALJ may request a transcript of the portion of the recording requested or have the party offering the recording to provide an exact identifiable portion of the recording the party seeks to admit. The identities of any person speaking on the portion of the tape being introduced must be established. An ALJ may allow the opposing party to offer additional portions of a recording to establish the context, or to rebut, the recording.
COMPENSATORY EDUCATION OR REIMBURSEMENT
Any party seeking reimbursement for expenditures shall present admissible evidence of these expenditures, or a stipulation to the amount of the expenditures. A party seeking compensatory education should provide evidence regarding the type, amount, duration, and need for any requested compensatory education. Documents offered as evidence to support a request for reimbursement must be separated by vendor.
MOTIONS
No prehearing motions are pending or contemplated. Any motion that was not filed three business days before the PHC, shall be supported by a declaration under penalty of perjury establishing good cause why the motion was not timely filed.
STIPULATIONS
Stipulations to pertinent facts, contentions, resolutions and authenticity and admissibility of documents are encouraged. Any proposed stipulation shall be submitted to the assigned ALJ in writing prior to the start of the hearing.
CONDUCT OF PARTICIPANTS AND HEARING ROOM DECORUM
All participants to the videoconference should observe the same decorum as in an in-person due process hearing. Participants must conduct themselves in a professional and courteous manner at all times. Cellular phones, telephones and computer notifications must be shut off or set to silent during the hearing unless the ALJ grants permission otherwise. Participants should appear from a private location, unless otherwise ordered. Participants should take reasonable efforts to minimize background noise and maintain adequate room lighting. Use of virtual background images are at the discretion of the ALJ. Witnesses are prohibited from reading exhibits, documents, notes, text messages, telephones or computers while testifying, unless permitted to do so by the ALJ. The parties, their representative and witnesses are prohibited from passing notes to, exchanging electronic messages with, or signaling the witness in any way while the witness is testifying.
LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS
Neither party requested a language interpreter or any accommodations.
A party or participant in this case, such as a witness, requiring reasonable accommodation to participate in a mediation or hearing may contact OAH at (916) 263-0880, or send an email to OAHADA@dgs.ca.gov as soon as the need is known. The e-mail should have “Request for Accommodation” in the Subject Line.
Additional information concerning requests for reasonable accommodation is available on OAH’s website at: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OAH/Services/Page-Content/Office-of- Administrative-Hearings-Services-List-Folder/Request-Reasonable-Accommodations- for-OAH-Legal-Proceedings.
HEARING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
The hearing is open to the public. Special education hearings are closed to the public unless a student requests the hearing to be open to the public.
An ALJ may restrict attendance because of the physical limitations of the hearing facility or take other action to promote due process or the orderly conduct of the hearing. (Cal. Code Regs., Tit. 1, § 1030.) Government Code, section 11425.20 empowers the ALJ to order an open hearing to be closed or make other protective orders to the extent necessary or proper to ensure a fair hearing in the circumstances of the case. Currently, amid COVID-19 concerns, all hearings are being conducted via videoconference without observers present or participating in the videoconference.
OAH will provide the hearing recording upon request.
SETTLEMENT
The parties are encouraged to continue working together to reach an agreement before the due process hearing. The parties shall inform OAH in writing immediately if they reach a settlement or otherwise resolve the dispute before the scheduled hearing.
In addition, if a settlement is reached within five days of the scheduled start of the due process hearing, the parties shall also inform OAH of the settlement by telephone at (916) 263-0880. At the same time, the parties should send the signature page of the signed agreement or a letter withdrawing the case to OAH by visiting OAH Secure e-file at https://www.applications.dgs.ca.gov/oah/oahsftweb.
If a full and final written settlement agreement is reached after 4:00 PM the day prior to hearing, the parties shall leave a voicemail message regarding the settlement at (916) 274-6035. The parties should also leave contact information such as cellular phone numbers of each party or counsel for each party.
Dates for hearing will not be cancelled until the letter of withdrawal or signature page of the signed agreement has been received and processed by OAH. If an agreement in principle is reached, the parties should plan to attend the scheduled hearing unless different arrangements have been agreed upon by the assigned ALJ. The assigned ALJ will check for messages before the hearing.
If the matter settles subject to board approval, in addition to a signed copy of the signature page of the settlement agreement, the parties shall provide the date of the next board meeting. The hearing dates will not be cancelled without this information.
FAILURE TO COMPLY
The failure to comply with this Order may result in the exclusion of evidence or other sanctions.
ORDER INCLUDES ALL RULINGS
This Order includes all rulings made at the prehearing conference. Any discussion and conversation not referenced in this Order is not binding on the ALJ conducting the hearing and may not be relied upon by the parties. The parties should be aware that, at hearing, the ALJ conducting the hearing has discretion to reconsider any part of this Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Jennifer Kelly Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings
