California OAH special education order · April 26, 2023
Order Denying Request for Continuance
OAH Case No. 2022120475 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH denied a joint request to continue the hearing because the district attorney's possible conflict with another hearing was only anticipated, not an actual scheduling conflict.
This case went to decision
Student v. Hacienda La Puente Unified School District: Hacienda La Puente Unified must repay $9,300 for IEEs, offer two assessments, and provide 19 reading hours; most claims denied. (2023)
Summary
Parent and Inglewood Unified jointly asked OAH to continue the May 9-11, 2023 hearing. They said Inglewood Unified's attorney might still be in another OAH hearing that week. That other hearing was set only for May 2-4, 2023, so the ALJ found that no actual conflict existed and that good cause was not shown. All prehearing conference and hearing dates stayed in place, and the parties may renew the request if a real conflict arises.
Why it matters
Even a joint continuance request can be denied. OAH treats continuances as disfavored, and a merely possible attorney scheduling conflict is not good cause. Parties should wait until the conflict is real, then document it when they ask.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a)
- Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (f)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332
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:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
INGLEWOOD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2022120475
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE
APRIL 26, 2023
On April 5, 2023, Parent on behalf of Student and Inglewood Unified School District filed a joint request to continue the due process hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings, called OAH. The parties state that Inglewood Unified’s attorney is scheduled to be in another due process hearing for OAH case number 2022110091, which is set to begin on May 2, 2023. Inglewood Unified’s attorney anticipates that hearing would not be completed until May 12, 2023, at the earliest. The parties seek a continuance of this matter to avoid conflicting hearing dates between this matter and the matter in OAH case number 2022110091. The matter in OAH case number 2022110091 is currently set for hearing on May 2, 3, and 4, 2023, with no additional hearing dates yet to be scheduled. The hearing in this matter is scheduled for May 9, 10, and 11, 2023.
OAH must conduct a due process hearing and issue a decision within 45 days of receiving the due process complaint unless an extension is granted. (34 C.F.R.
§ 300.515(a); Ed. Code, §§ 56502, subd. (f), 56505, subd. (f)(3).) Resolving the due process hearing quickly is legally required. Hearings may only be continued if good cause is established. (Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3).) OAH is guided by the Administrative Procedure Act and the California Rules of Court when ruling on continuance motions. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.)
Good cause to continue a hearing may include:
• An essential lay or expert witness is unavailable because of death, illness,
or other excusable circumstances;
• A party is unavailable because of death, illness, or other excusable
circumstances;
• A party’s attorney is unavailable because of death, illness, or other
excusable circumstances;
• A new attorney substitutes in, but only if the party establishes that the
substitution is required in the interests of justice;
• A new party is added, and the new party has not had a reasonable
opportunity to prepare for trial, or other parties have not had a reasonable opportunity to prepare for trial regarding the new party's involvement;
• A party is unable to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other
material evidence despite diligent efforts; or
• The case has a significant and unexpected change which makes the case
not ready for trial.
Generally, continuances are disfavored. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).)
The parties did not establish good cause to continue the due process hearing.
Though the parties anticipate a scheduling conflict may arise if the hearing in OAH case number 2022110091 is continued to the following week to May 9, 2023, no actual conflict exists at this time. The parties may renew their request for a continuance of this matter when an actual scheduling conflict exists. Accordingly, the request for a continuance is denied. All prehearing conference and due process hearing dates are confirmed and will proceed as calendared.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Rommel P. Cruz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings