California OAH special education order · July 12, 2024
Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference
OAH Case No. 2024020026 · ALJ Ted Mann
OAH set four FAPE issues for a three-day video hearing. It deferred Los Angeles' motion claiming it is not a proper party to written briefing and a threshold evidentiary hearing on the first hearing day.
This case went to decision
Student v. Los Angeles Unified School District: Los Angeles Unified dismissed because a directly funded charter school, not the district, was responsible for the student's FAPE. (2024)
Summary
At the prehearing conference, Student dropped Issues 4, 5 and 7. The ALJ restated the remaining claims as four issues: the October 11, 2022 IEP's handling of reading and writing, behavior, and attention and executive functioning needs, and the June 8, 2023 decision that Student was no longer eligible for special education. Los Angeles had moved to dismiss, arguing it was not the agency responsible for Student's FAPE, and Student opposed. The ALJ did not decide that motion on the papers. Instead, the ALJ ordered briefs by July 19, 2024 and set an evidentiary hearing on that question as the first item on July 23, 2024, with Student bearing the burden of proving Los Angeles was responsible.
Why it matters
When a district claims it was not responsible for a student's education, OAH may require the parent to prove the district's responsibility with evidence at the start of the hearing. Families should prepare residency and enrollment proof and the related witnesses in advance.
Key authority cited
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g)
- Ed. Code § 56505, subd. (e)(7)
- Ed. Code § 56505.1, subd. (h)
- J.W. v. Fresno Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431
- M.C. v. Antelope Valley Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189
- Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49
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.
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024020026
ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING CONFERENCE FOR
HEARING BY VIDEOCONFERENCE
JULY 12, 2024
On July 12, 2024, Administrative Law Judge Ted Mann, 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.
Attorney Diana Maltz appeared on behalf of Student. Attorney Patrick Balucan appeared on behalf of Los Angeles Unified School District. The PHC was recorded.
Based upon discussion with the parties, the ALJ issues the following order:
HEARING DATES, TIMES, AND LOCATION
DUE PROCESS HEARING
The hearing will take place on July 23, 2024 through July 25, 2024, and continue day to day, Mondays and Fridays included, 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.
The parties anticipate it will take three days to complete the hearing. Additional hearing dates will be discussed with the ALJ during the hearing.
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
During the prehearing conference, Student dismissed Issues 4., 5. and 7.
Pursuant to discussions with the parties during the Prehearing Conference, the ALJ has clarified the statement of some issues and re-ordered the issues as allowed by the holdings in J.W. v. Fresno Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431, 442-443, and Ford v. Long Beach Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2002) 291 F.3d 1086, 1090. No change in substance has been made.
ISSUES
1. Did Los Angeles deny Student a free appropriate public education, called a
FAPE, by failing to appropriately address Student’s academic development needs in the areas of reading and written expression with needed goals and services via the October 11, 2022 individual educational program, called an IEP?
2. Did Los Angeles deny Student a FAPE by failing to appropriately address
Student’s behavioral needs regarding disruptive behavior and off-task behavior via the October 11, 2022 IEP?
3. Did Los Angeles deny Student a FAPE by failing to appropriately address
Student’s attention needs and executive functioning needs via the October 11, 2022 IEP in the form of necessary goals, services, accommodations and supports?
4. Did Los Angeles deny Student a FAPE by finding Student ineligible for
special education and terminating his IEP on or about June 8, 2023? The parties are responsible for carefully reviewing the issues as stated in this prehearing conference order. These will be the issues considered at hearing. A party believing that an issue has been misstated or improperly omitted shall promptly file a notice in writing, prior to the first day of hearing, stating its concern and referring to supporting portions of the complaint.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
The resolutions requested by Student include compensatory education services, provided by a non-public agency, in the areas of academic instruction, educational therapy, behavior intervention services, counseling services and executive functioning training.
OAH has not received a copy of Los Angeles’ response to Student’s complaint.
Los Angeles shall file its response with OAH within three business days from the date of this PHC. (M.C. v. Antelope Valley Unified 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 of 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). If further assistance is needed, please contact OAH at OAHSEOps@dgs.ca.gov.
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. Los Angeles must use the letter D before the number to identify Los Angeles’ exhibits. For example, S-1 means Student’s exhibit 1 and D-1 means Los Angeles’ 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 to their credentials.
Los Angeles’ exhibits must include a copy of the school calendar for each school year in question.
Electronic copies of exhibits shall be uploaded 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 upload 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 if a motion for telephonic testimony is made prior to the first day of 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 Thursday, July 18, 2024, 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, Los Angeles shall inform Student which proposed witnesses are District employees. Each side will inform the other whether witnesses under their control must be subpoenaed instead of just given notice to attend the hearing on a certain date and time. However, every party is responsible for getting their witnesses to the hearing. A party’s failure to properly notify or subpoena a witness is not an excuse justifying additional hearing time, or a delay in the hearing.
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(s) 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 Los Angeles’, unless otherwise ordered.
WITNESS LISTS
The parties must provide a joint proposed witness schedule to the ALJ on or before the first day of hearing. The schedule should include the first and last name of the witness, their title, 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 schedule. 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 prior to the first day of the hearing.
ELECTRONIC RECORDINGS
AUDIO RECORDING
A party’s attorney may request permission to make an audio recording of the hearing for personal note-taking purposes. 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 District’s requests to make an audio recording of the hearing are granted subject to the above-listed conditions.
VIDEO RECORDING
No party, witness or anyone else may videorecord any part of the proceedings or stream live through any means.
RECORDINGS AS EXHIBITS
Neither party has stated an intention to offer 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
On July 9, 2024, Los Angeles file a motion to dismiss Los Angeles as not a proper party to the case. On July 11, 2024, Student filed an Opposition to Los Angeles’ motion.
In response to the contested issue, this issue of Los Angeles’ obligation to provide FAPE during the timeframe at issue in the complaint in this matter is set for further briefing and an evidentiary hearing as follows:
1. Parties are to file legal briefs addressing the issue of whether Los Angeles is
an appropriate party to this matter. The briefs are due to be filed electronically with OAH by noon on Friday, July 19, 2024. The briefs are limited to a maximum of 20 pages, exclusive of exhibits and indices.
2. The first issue addressed at the hearing on Tuesday, July 23, 2024, will be
whether Los Angeles had responsibility for providing a FAPE to Student during the timeframe of this complaint. The parties shall present witnesses and evidence on this issue only. This may result in some witnesses being called twice. The parties must include exhibits they intend to use to prove their positions on this issue in their respective Case Center flings pursuant to Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). Student will have the burden of proof that Los Angeles had an obligation to provide FAPE during the timeframe at issue in the complaint and is an appropriate party to this matter.
3. Following the conclusion of the hearing on the issue of LAUSD’s obligation to
provide FAPE during the timeframe at issue , the ALJ will recess to consider the evidence. Following that recess, the ALJ will state the determination on the record. The full analysis of the issue will be included in the written decision following the hearing.
No other 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 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 an interpreter for the hearing. Nor has either party requested a reasonable accommodation of a disability.
A party requiring an interpreter for a participant or witness must notify OAH immediately so that arrangements for an interpreter can be made.
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 CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC
The hearing is closed to the public. Special education hearings are closed to the public unless Student requests the hearing to be open to the public.
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.
Ted Mann Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings
