California OAH special education order · February 24, 2023
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss Summary Judgement
OAH Case No. 2023020144 · ALJ Ted Mann
OAH denied Student's motion to dismiss because it raised factual disputes and sought a ruling on the merits, and special education law has no summary judgment procedure.
This case went to decision
Newark Unified School District v. Student: Newark Unified may reassess student without parent consent; ALJ rejects parent's objection to standardized testing. (2023)
Summary
Student moved to dismiss the due process hearing request, arguing that a number of factual issues required dismissal. Newark Unified opposed, arguing that Student's points were purely factual and did not affect OAH's jurisdiction, and both sides argued the motion at the February 24, 2023 prehearing conference. OAH explained that it will dismiss claims that are clearly outside its jurisdiction, such as civil rights claims, Section 504 claims, enforcement of settlement agreements, or claims against the wrong parties. It denied this motion because it asked for a ruling on the merits, which would amount to summary judgment, and confirmed all existing dates.
Why it matters
A motion to dismiss at OAH can only remove claims that are plainly outside OAH's authority. Factual disputes about the case must be decided at the hearing, not through an early summary-judgment-style motion.
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.
NEWARK UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2023020144
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS SUMMARY
JUDGEMENT
FEBRUARY 24, 2023
On February 16, 2023, Student filed a motion to dismiss with the Office of Administrative Hearings asserting that a host of factual issues rendered the due process hearing request subject to dismissal. On February 21, 2023, Newark Unified School District filed an opposition, arguing that Student’s contentions were exclusively factual and did not present any issue affecting jurisdiction by OAH or pre-empting jurisdiction by OAH. The issue was further argued by both parties during the prehearing conference, called a PHC, held on February 24, 2023.
Although OAH will grant motions to dismiss allegations that are facially outside of OAH jurisdiction such as, civil rights claims, section 504 claims, enforcement of settlement agreements, or incorrect parties, special education law does not provide for a summary judgment procedure. Here, the motion to dismiss is not limited to matters that are facially outside of OAH jurisdiction, but instead seeks a ruling on the merits.
Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied. All dates currently set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Ted Mann Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings