California OAH special education order · June 11, 2024
Order Granting Request for Continuance and Setting Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing
OAH Case No. 2024050547 · ALJ Kara Hatfield
OAH granted Stockton's opposed request for a three-week continuance because Parents' earlier-filed case for their other child was set for hearing on the same dates with the same attorneys.
This case went to decision
Student v. Stockton Unified School District: Stockton Unified prevails on all 15 claims about assessments, goals, services, and placement for third grader with autism. (2024)
Summary
Stockton asked to continue the due process hearing because Parents' earlier-filed case for their other child was set for hearing on the same June 25–27, 2024 dates, with the same lawyers on both sides. Student opposed, citing the statutory right to a timely hearing and refusing to consent to delay. OAH found good cause for a brief three-week continuance so the earlier case could be heard and finished first. The prehearing conference was reset to July 8, 2024, and the hearing to July 16–18, 2024.
Why it matters
Filing separate cases for siblings close together can lead OAH to delay the later case over a parent's objection when the hearing dates overlap. OAH treats a scheduling conflict with the earlier case as good cause for a short continuance, even though continuances are generally disfavored.
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:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
STOCKTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024050547
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE AND
SETTING PREHEARING CONFERENCE AND
DUE PROCESS HEARING
JUNE 11, 2024
On June 6, 2024, Stockton Unified School District filed a request to continue the due process hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings, OAH. On June 11, 2024, Student opposed the request.
Stockton contends the hearing should be continued because Parents and Stockton are currently scheduled for a due process hearing on the same dates in an earlier-filed case concerning Parents’ other child. Parents filed OAH case number 2024050109 regarding another child on May 2, 2024, then filed this case regarding Student on May 10, 2024. OAH set both matters for prehearing conferences on June 14, 2024, and due process hearings on June 25, 26, and 27, 2024. The same law firm represents Parents in both cases, and Stockton is represented by the same attorneys for both cases. Student contends the hearing should not be continued because Student has a statutory right to a timely hearing and Student does not consent to any delay.
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).)
Stockton established good cause to continue the due process hearing in the later-filed case for three weeks. A brief continuance affords Stockton, its administrative representative, and its attorneys the opportunity to participate in and conclude the due process hearing of the earlier-filed matter for Parents’ other child before beginning the due process hearing for Student.
The request is granted. All previously scheduled dates are vacated. The new dates are:
PREHEARING CONFERENCE will be held on July 8, 2024, at 3:00 PM.
DUE PROCESS HEARING will be held on July 16, 17, and 18, 2024.
The prehearing conference and due process hearing will be held by videoconference or telephone, unless otherwise ordered. The due process hearing will begin at 9:30 AM on all days, and generally end at 3:30 PM, unless otherwise ordered.
The hearing will continue day to day, as needed, Mondays and Fridays included, at the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. Prehearing conference statements and motions are due to OAH no later than three business days before the prehearing conference. Late motions will only be considered if good cause is established for the late filing.
The parties must immediately give potential witnesses the hearing dates, and must subpoena witnesses, if necessary, so they are available to testify. Failing to properly notify or subpoena a witness is not good cause to delay the hearing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Kara Hatfield Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings