California OAH special education order · June 5, 2025
Order Granting Fremont Unified School District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Michelle Quintero, Andrea Chase, and Joanna Haas
OAH Case No. 2025030065 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH quashed Student's records subpoenas to a behavior specialist and two classroom assistants. Most requested records were not reasonably necessary, and the core records were already ordered from the school director.
Summary
Fremont Unified moved to quash Student's subpoenas duces tecum to behavior specialist Michelle Quintero and classroom assistants Andrea Chase and Joanna Haas at Esther B. Clarke Schools. The District argued the subpoenas were overbroad, unduly burdensome, and did not show the records were reasonably necessary. OAH found that only Student's course descriptions, report cards, transcripts, progress reports, and assessments were reasonably necessary to the placement claim. Because a prior order already required the school director, Tara Keith, to produce those records, OAH quashed the records subpoenas but left in effect the subpoenas requiring the three staff members to testify.
Why it matters
Subpoenas for records must show reasonable necessity tied to the hearing issues. Broad requests for curricula, syllabi, and every worksheet are likely to be cut back, and OAH will not order duplicate production from several staff when one custodian is already producing the key records.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(h)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (e)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (c)(2)
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1985, subd. (b)
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.1
- Johnson v. Superior Court (1968) 258 Cal.App.2d 829
People named in the order
- Michelle Quintero, Behavior specialist, Esther B. Clarke Schools
- Andrea Chase, Classroom assistant, Esther B. Clarke Schools
- Joanna Haas, Classroom assistant, Esther B. Clarke Schools
- Tara Keith, Director, Esther B. Clarke Schools
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.
FREMONT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2025030065
ORDER GRANTING FREMONT UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT’S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS DUCES
TECUM FOR MICHELLE QUINTERO, ANDREA CHASE, AND
JOANNA HAAS
JUNE 5, 2025
On March 3, 2025, Parents on behalf of Student filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, called OAH, a due process hearing request naming Fremont Unified School District. On May 6, 2025, OAH continued the hearing for good cause and set the hearing to begin on June 10, 2025.
On May 20, 2025, Student issued subpoenas duces tecum on Michelle Quintero, Andrea Chase, and Joanna Haas. According to the subpoenas, Quintero is a behavior specialist, and Chase and Haas classroom assistants, at Esther B. Clarke Schools.
The records sought in the subpoena for Quintero consist of:
1. curriculum, textbook, and instructional materials with information of
publisher, and grade levels for the all of the Social Skill Class that were used to teach Student and the class during the 2024 extended school and 2024-25 school year;
2. schedules for Student’s social skill class with date, time and duration
during the 2024 extended school year and 2024-25 school year;
3. the social skill class syllabus with information including but not limited to
covered topics, outline, classwork and homework policy/rules, make- up/missed work rules/policy, grading criteria, grading accommodations and modifications, and grading table during 2024 extended school year and 2024-25 school year; and
4. records related to the social skills class courses and individualized
education program, called IEP, goals (including but not limited to class syllabi, transcripts, modified/reduced work completion plan, progress reports, report cards, teacher/behavior specialist notes, all of Student’s completed worksheets, work samples, assignments, classwork, homework, course tests/quizzes/projects/assessments and data collection of IEP goals that Quintero held at school, learning history of social skill class)
associated with the delivery of education and related services to Student.
The subpoenas for Chase and Haas are similar in the types of records requested.
The subpoena for Chase seeks records during the 2023-2024 school year. The subpoena for Haas seeks records for the 2024 extended school year and 2024-2025, school year.
The records sought in the subpoenas for Chase and Haas consist of:
1. curriculum, textbook, and instructional materials with information of
publisher, and grade levels for all of the elective courses that were used to teach Student in the classroom assistant’s class;
2. schedules of all elective courses with course names, date, time and
duration from the classroom assistant’s class;
3. all elective courses syllabus in the classroom assistant’s class with
information including but not limited to course names, covered topics, outline, classwork and homework policy/rules, make-up/missed work rules/policy, grading criteria, grading accommodations and modifications, and grading table;
4. information of all elective courses in the classroom assistant’s class as
recorded in the Course Catalog including but not limited to course name, course code, subject, grade levels, recommended prerequisites, course description, length of course (number of minutes per period, number of periods per week, number of semesters), and course credits per semester;
and
5. records related to elective courses and IEP goals (including but not limited
to class syllabi, transcripts, modified/reduced work completion plan, progress reports, report cards, teacher/classroom assistant notes, all of Student’s completed worksheets, work samples, assignments, classwork, homework, course tests/quizzes/projects and data collection of IEP goals that the classroom assistant held at school, learning history of elective course that was considered to conclude the semester grade) associated with the delivery of education and related services to Student.
In the subpoenas, Parent declared the records sought from Quintero, Haas, and Chase are necessary for Student to prove Fremont Unified denied Student a free appropriate public education, called FAPE, and predetermined Student’s individualized education program, called IEP, placement and program.
On May 28, 2025, Fremont Unified filed a motion to quash the subpoenas duces tecum for Quintero, Chase, and Haas. Fremont Unified contends the subpoenas should be quashed because the subpoenas fail to demonstrate the requested documents are reasonably necessary, and the requests are overbroad and places an undue burden on the subpoenaed person.
On May 30, 2025, Student filed an opposition to the motion. Student contends the records sought from Quintero, Chase, and Haas are necessary to determine if Student was provided an appropriate placement with a curriculum that allowed for grade-level academic credit in core subjects.
A party to a due process hearing under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, called IDEA, has the right to present evidence and compel the attendance of witnesses in a hearing conducted pursuant to subsection (f) or (k) of section 1415 of title 20 of the United States Code. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(h); see also Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (e).)
In California special education proceedings, the hearing officer shall have the right to issue a subpoena duces tecum, which orders the production of documents or papers upon a showing of reasonable necessity by a party. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (c)(2).) This requirement mirrors that required by Code of Civil Procedure section 1985, subdivision (b), which requires:
A copy of an affidavit shall be served with a subpoena duces tecum . . ., showing good cause for the production of the matters and things described in the subpoena, specifying the exact matters or things desired to be produced, setting forth in full detail the materiality thereof to the issues involved in the case, and stating that the witness has the desired matters or things in his or her possession or under his or her control.
The good cause requirement is met by a factual showing of why the requested documents or things are material and relevant to the litigated issues. (Johnson v.
Superior Court (1968) 258 Cal.App.2d 829, 835-836; see also Seven Up Bottling Company v. Superior Court (1951) Cal.App.2d 71, 77.)
Special education law does not specifically address motions to quash subpoenas or subpoenas duces tecum. In ruling on such motions, OAH relies by analogy on the relevant portions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1, provides that a court may make an order quashing a subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon such terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders.
The issues to be heard and decided at hearing involve Fremont Unified’s alleged failure from March 7, 2024, through March 3, 2025, to offer an appropriate placement that met Student’s unique disability-related needs and provided Student access to grade-level academic credit in core subjects. Student argues in his due process hearing request that the March 7, 2024, IEP’s offer of placement in a counseling-enriched special day class at Student’s home school was inappropriate to meet his social-emotional, behavioral, and academic needs.
Student established descriptions of his courses, his report cards, transcripts, and progress reports, and assessments at Ester B. Clark Schools are documents reasonably necessary to determine his academic and functional performance during the 2023-2024, and 2024-2025 school years. Student’s academic and functional performance is relevant to whether Fremont Unified offered an appropriate placement from March 7, 2024, that met Student’s disability-related needs and allowed him access to grade-level academic credit in core subjects.
However, Student failed to establish any other types of records sought in the subpoenas duces tecum are reasonably necessary. The types of records described in the subpoenas above, beyond the descriptions of Student’s courses, his report cards, transcripts, progress reports, and assessments, are not reasonably necessary to determine the appropriateness of Fremont Unified’s offered placement based on Student’s academic and functional performance and needs.
On June 4, 2025, OAH issued an order granting in part Fremont Unified’s motion to quash Student’s subpoena duces tecum for Tara Keith, Director of Esther B. Clarke Schools. OAH modified the subpoena requiring Keith to produce documents from the 2023-2024 school year, through the 2024-2025 school year of descriptions of Student’s courses, his report cards, transcripts, progress reports, and assessments.
In light of the modified subpoena for Keith, production of the descriptions of Student’s courses, his report cards, transcripts, progress reports, and assessments, during the 2023-2024 school year, through the 2024-2025 school year, from Quintero, Chase, and Haas are not necessary. Accordingly, the motion to quash the subpoenas duces tecum for Quintero, Chase, and Haas is granted.
The subpoenas requiring Quintero, Chase, and Haas to appear to testify at the videoconference hearing at the date and time indicated in their subpoenas remains in effect.
ORDER
1. Fremont Unified’s motion to quash Student’s subpoenas duces tecum to
Michelle Quintero, Andrea Chase, and Joanna Haas is granted. The subpoenas for records to Michelle Quintero, Andrea Chase, and Joanna Haas are hereby quashed.
2. The subpoenas requiring Michelle Quintero, Andrea Chase, and Joanna
Haas to appear at the videoconference hearing to testify remains in effect.
Michelle Quintero, Andrea Chase, and Joanna Haas shall appear to testify at the date and time stated in their subpoenas, unless otherwise ordered.
3. Student shall immediately serve a copy of this Order on Michelle Quintero,
Andrea Chase, and Joanna Haas.
Rommel P. Cruz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings