California OAH special education order · March 10, 2023
Order Denying Request to Present Additional Evidence and Witnesses
OAH Case No. 2023010155 · ALJ Margaret Gibson
OAH denied Student's request to call witnesses and present evidence at a motion hearing on reopening the record, because that hearing was set only for oral argument.
Summary
Student asked OAH to vacate the completed hearing and reopen the record, and OAH set a motion hearing for oral argument. Student's newly retained attorney then filed a 122-page 'Evidence List for Hearing' naming witnesses and evidence for the motion hearing. OAH treated this as a request to present evidence and witnesses. Long Beach objected with a motion in limine. OAH denied the request because the motion hearing was set only for the parties' arguments, not a full evidentiary hearing. The attorneys were told to be ready to argue whether to reopen the hearing and, if it is reopened, how to handle the testimony and evidence already presented.
Why it matters
When OAH sets a motion hearing for oral argument, parties should not expect to call witnesses or submit new evidence there. Any supporting evidence for a motion to reopen should go in with the written papers or be raised through a separate request.
People named in the order
- Ted Mann, Administrative Law Judge
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:
LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
v.
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2023010155
ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO PRESENT ADDITIONAL
EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES
MARCH 10, 2023
On March 3, 2023, Administrative Law Judge Ted Mann ordered the parties in this case to appear at a motion hearing on March 13, 2023, at 10:00 am. The motion hearing was ordered in response to Student’s request to vacate the hearing that was held in this matter and reopen the record. The parties were ordered to appear at the motion hearing to “present their arguments orally before the ALJ…” The order also granted leave for Long Beach Unified to file a written response to Student’s motion no later than 3:00 pm on Monday, March 3, 2023. Long Beach filed a timely written response.
Since then, Student has retained the services of an attorney, and both sides have filed additional documents on this same issue. On March 6, 2023, Student’s attorney filed a document titled “Evidence List for Hearing.” This document is 122 pages long and contains a list of multiple witnesses and evidence she intends to introduce at the motion hearing. This is being deemed a motion to be allowed to present evidence and witnesses at the motion hearing. On March 9, 2023, Long Beach filed a Motion in Limine objecting to Student’s intention to present evidence and call witnesses.
The ALJ in this matter specifically set this hearing to hear arguments from the parties and did not order a full hearing with witnesses and evidence. Therefore, all requests for witnesses to appear at the hearing and to present additional evidence is denied. The attorneys should be prepared to make oral arguments regarding the issue of re-opening the hearing and, if the hearing is reopened, how to handle the issue of the testimony and evidence that have already been presented in this matter.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Margaret Gibson Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings