California OAH special education order · September 26, 2024
Order Denying Motion to Unexpedite Hearing
OAH Case No. 2024090607 · ALJ Cole Dalton
OAH denied Student's unopposed motion to unexpedite because the complaint still alleged a failure to hold a manifestation determination meeting, an issue that legally requires an expedited hearing.
Summary
Student filed a due process complaint, and OAH set expedited mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates. Student then moved to unexpedite the matter and vacate the expedited dates, and Orange County Academy filed a notice of non-opposition. OAH denied the motion anyway. Student's complaint alleged that the school failed to hold a manifestation determination meeting after suspensions and removal, which is a discipline claim under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k). Student had not withdrawn that issue, so the expedited timeline is mandatory and the expedited hearing will go forward on that issue as scheduled.
Why it matters
When a complaint raises a discipline or manifestation determination claim, OAH must hold an expedited hearing even if both sides agree to slow things down. To get off the expedited track, the student must withdraw the expedited issue or choose to challenge the placement change under the non-expedited provision.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(4)(B)
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(a)
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(c)(2)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6)(A)
- Molina v. Bd. of Educ. of Los Lunas Schools (D.N.M. 2016) 157 F.Supp.3d 1064
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.
ORANGE COUNTY ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND ARTS.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024090607
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO UNEXPEDITE HEARING
SEPTEMBER 26, 2024
On September 17, 2024, Student filed a request for due process hearing, complaint, against Orange County Academy of Sciences and Arts. September 18, 2024, based on issues asserted in the complaint, the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, issued a Scheduling Order and Notice of Expedited and Non- Expedited Due Process Hearing and Mediation, Scheduling Order. The Scheduling Order set this matter for expedited mediation on October 1, 2024, expedited prehearing conference on October 7, 2024, and expedited hearing for October 15, 16, and 17, 2024.
On September 25, 2024, Student filed a motion to unexpedite this matter and vacate the expedited dates. On September 25, 2024, Orange County Academy filed a notice of non-opposition.
A parent of a child with a disability who disagrees with any decision by a school district regarding a change in educational placement of the child based upon a violation of a code of student conduct, or who disagrees with a manifestation determination made by the district, may request and is entitled to receive an expedited due process hearing. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)(A); 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(a) (2006), all subsequent references to the Code of Federal Regulations are to the 2006 version.) An expedited due process hearing before OAH must occur within 20 school days of the date the complaint requesting the hearing is filed. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(4)(B); 34 C.F.R.
§ 300.532(c)(2).) The procedural right to an expedited due process hearing is mandatory and does not authorize OAH to make exceptions or grant continuances of expedited matters. (Ibid.) A matter can only be unexpedited or continued if no issue is alleged that is subject to an expedited hearing, if the student withdraws the issues in the complaint that triggered the expedited hearing, or if the student elects to challenge the change of placement under title 20, section 1415, subdivision (b)(6)(A) and not subdivision (k). (Molina v. Bd. of Educ. of Los Lunas Schools (D.N.M. 2016) 157 F.Supp.3d 1064, 1068-1071.)
Student alleges, as Issue 1, subsection o, but misidentified as a second “d”, that Orange County Academy denied him a free appropriate public education by failing to hold a manifestation determination meeting upon Student’s suspensions and removal from school. Student further alleges, in his complaint, that Orange County Academy was required to hold a manifestation determination meeting to look further at his behaviors and whether they were a manifestation of his disabilities or failure to implement his IEP. Issue 1, subdivision o, alleges a violation of 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k), requiring an expedited hearing. Once these issues are raised, the expedited hearing time frame applies.
Student has not withdrawn Issue 1, subdivision o, from the complaint.
Accordingly, the motion to unexpedite the hearing dates must be denied.
1. The motion to unexpedite the hearing is denied.
2. The expedited hearing shall proceed on Issue 1, subdivision d, as
scheduled.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Cole Dalton Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings