California OAH special education order · August 8, 2024
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Insufficient; Order Denying Motion to Dismiss as Moot
OAH Case No. 2024070763 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH found Student's complaint wholly insufficient because its allegations of fraud, perjury, and obstruction by Del Mar Union and its attorneys were not tied to Student's identification, evaluation, placement, or FAPE.
Summary
Del Mar Union filed a combined motion to dismiss and alternative notice of insufficiency against Student's due process complaint. OAH found the complaint insufficient. It alleged obstruction, fraud, conspiracy, perjury, abuse of power, and destruction of evidence by the District and its attorneys, but did not explain how these acts related to Student's identification, evaluation, educational placement, or FAPE. The description of the District agreeing to fund an independent educational evaluation, rescinding, and later agreeing again also did not state a clear claim. Student was given 14 days to amend, all dates were vacated, the motion to dismiss was denied as moot, and the District was told to file insufficiency notices and motions to dismiss separately.
Why it matters
OAH can only hear claims tied to a child's identification, evaluation, placement, or FAPE, so accusations of misconduct must be linked to how they affected the student's education. Parents without attorneys can ask OAH for a mediator to help them frame issues before amending.
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)
- Ed. Code, § 56501
- Ed. Code, § 56505
- Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 223 F.3d 1026
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.
DEL MAR UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024070763
ORDER DETERMINING DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
INSUFFICIENT; ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS
MOOT
AUGUST 8, 2024
On July 22, 2024, Parent on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming Del Mar Union School District. The Office of Administrative Hearings is called OAH.
On August 6, 2022, Del Mar Union filed a Motion to Dismiss Request for Due Process Hearing and/or Alternative Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint. Del Mar Union and its attorneys are ordered that Notices of Insufficiency and Motions to Dismiss are to be filed separately as they have different timelines for ruling and involve different legal analysis.
The purpose of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1400 et.
seq.) is to ensure:
• all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate
public education, called a FAPE, that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment and independent living, and
• the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected.
(20 U.S.C. § 1400(d)(1); see Ed. Code, § 56000, subd. (a).)
A party has the right to present a complaint with respect to any matter relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a FAPE to such child. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6); Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a) [party has a right to present a complaint regarding matters involving proposal or refusal to initiate or change the identification, assessment, or educational placement of a child; the provision of a free appropriate public education to a child; the refusal of a parent or guardian to consent to an assessment of a child; or a disagreement between a parent or guardian and the public education agency as to the availability of a program appropriate for a child, including the question of financial responsibility].) The jurisdiction of OAH is limited to these matters. (Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified School. Dist. (9th Cir. 2000)
223 F.3d 1026, 1028-1029.)
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 is wholly insufficient. The problems described in the complaint involve alleged acts of obstruction, fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, perjury, abuse of power, and destruction of evidence by Del Mar Union and its attorneys.
However, the complaint fails to describe how any of these alleged acts relate to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the Student, or the provision of a FAPE to Student, to provide Del Mar Union with an awareness and understanding of the claims within OAH’s jurisdiction.
Furthermore, the complaint’s description of an alleged agreement by Del Mar Union to fund an independent educational evaluation requested by Parent, only to rescind that agreement, and for Del Mar Union to eventually agree to fund the evaluation is also insufficient. The complaint fails to provide Del Mar Union with an awareness and understanding of a claim involving that alleged series of events.
The complaint fails it to provide Del Mar Union with an awareness and understanding of the issues within OAH’s jurisdiction that form the basis of the complaint. Accordingly, Student’s complaint is insufficient.
MEDIATOR ASSISTANCE FOR NON-REPRESENTED PARENTS: A parent without an attorney may request that OAH provide a mediator to assist the parent in identifying the issues and proposed resolutions that must be included in a complaint. (Ed. Code, § 56505.) Parents are encouraged to contact OAH for assistance if they intend to amend their due process hearing request.
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 no 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.
6. Del Mar Union’s motion to dismiss is denied as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Rommel P. Cruz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings