California OAH special education order · March 25, 2024
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Insufficient
OAH Case No. 2024030509 · ALJ Jennifer Kelly
OAH found Student's complaint insufficient because it described two different students, with the facts about one and the legal issues and resolutions about another, making it vague and confusing.
Summary
Bellflower filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint, and Student filed a response. OAH found the complaint insufficient because its factual background referred to one student while its legal issues and proposed resolutions referred to another. OAH said it was unclear whether this was a drafting mistake, so the complaint did not accurately identify the student. Student was given 14 days to file an amended complaint or face dismissal, and all dates were vacated.
Why it matters
Reusing text from another complaint can get a case thrown back even under OAH's liberal pleading standard. Proofread the complaint so the student, facts, issues, and remedies all match, or you lose time and your hearing dates.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(D)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 Fed. Reg. 46,540-46541, 46699
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.
BELLFLOWER UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024030509
ORDER DETERMINING DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
INSUFFICIENT
MARCH 25, 2024
On March 14, 2024, Parent on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Bellflower Unified School District, called Bellflower. On March 21, 2024, Bellflower filed a notice of insufficiency as to the complaint. On May 25, 2024, Student filed a response to Bellflower’s notice of insufficiency.
The named parties have the right to challenge the complaint’s sufficiency.
(20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
A complaint is sufficient if it: (1) describes the problem relating to the proposed change regarding the student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing the student a free appropriate public education; (2) includes facts about the problem; and (3) includes a proposed resolution to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. (See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess.
(2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.)
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108- 185, supra, at p. 34.) The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept.
10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Bd. Of Educ. V. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd. (M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. Opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. Of Educ. (3d Cir.
2009) 306 Fed.Appx. 772, 775 [nonpub. opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. Of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
Student’s complaint refers to two different students. The factual background of the complaint refers to one student, and the legal issues and resolutions refer to another. It is unclear whether this was a scrivener’s error, meaning a mistake in drafting the complaint, or whether the legal issues refer to a different student. As a result, the complaint does not accurately identify the student and is vague and confusing.
Therefore, the complaint is insufficiently pled.
ORDER
1. Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled under title 20 United States Code
section 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).
3. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20 United
States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii) and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the complaint will be
dismissed.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Jennifer Kelly Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings