Subpoenas, motions to compel, and records
579 California OAH special education orders on subpoenas, motions to compel, and records, newest first, each with a plain-English summary. Search and filter these orders.
2026
- Order Granting Motion to Quash in Part and Modifying Subpoena Duces TecumOAH partly granted Student's motion to quash San Lorenzo Valley's subpoena to Student's private school, sending records to OAH rather than district counsel and narrowing the time frame and correspondence requests.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Student's September 11, 2026, Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for communications between Irvine's counsel and its witnesses because Student did not show reasonable necessity, did not explain why the records were not privileged, and duplicated an earlier subpoena.
- Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Student's Motion to Compel Production of RecordsOAH ordered Assurance to produce any education records not yet provided by September 23, 2026, but denied Student's requests for non-education records and for confirmation that all records were produced, because prehearing discovery is not allowed.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference; Denying Motion to QuashOAH denied Goleta's motion to quash Student's subpoenas duces tecum as moot because the hearing was continued and the service date changed, and set nine issues for a videoconference hearing.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Document ProductionOAH denied Student's motion to compel Riverside to produce staff CVs, contracts, provider packets, and IEE protocols because there is no prehearing discovery right and Student did not show the documents were education records.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Marta ShinnOAH narrowed Hesperia's subpoena to Student's outside expert, excluding records reflecting Student's attorneys' impressions or legal theories and documents Hesperia itself authored, but required production of the rest.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for David YoungOAH narrowed Hesperia's subpoena for Student's neurologist's records to documents tied to a single July 3, 2025 occupational therapy note, finding the request overbroad and invasive of Student's medical privacy.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Student's ExpertsOAH denied Student's motion to quash or modify Irvine's subpoenas to Student's three experts, finding the records reasonably necessary and not work product once the experts were designated to testify.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Irvine's Custodian of RecordsOAH quashed Student's subpoena for Irvine's emails and staff-counsel communications because Student did not show reasonable necessity and the requests were vague and overbroad.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena, in PartOAH quashed most of Parents' subpoena for district records as overbroad and lacking a factual showing of reasonable necessity, but ordered San Marcos Unified to produce complete speech, OT, and SAI service logs.
- Order Granting Hesperia's Motion to Quash 17 Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed all 17 of Student's subpoenas duces tecum because none had a valid production date and Student never showed the subpoenas were actually served on the recipients.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to quash Los Angeles Unified's subpoena for Student's settlement agreement with a charter school, finding it reasonably necessary to prevent double recovery of remedies.
- Order Denying Request for Continuance and Interference With Subpoenas and Student Attorney AdmonishmentOAH denied Student's motion to continue the hearing and to stop Grossmont from interfering with subpoenas. Student's attorney skipped the ordered meet and confer and tried to subpoena about 17 undisclosed district witnesses.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Eva Nicolosi and Bruce BloomOAH quashed Palo Alto's subpoenas for Student's private assessors' records because the district's declaration of necessity did not match the issues it raised for hearing.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference, Granting Motion to Consolidate and Continue, Designating Student's Case as Primary Case, Granting Motion to Compel Observations, and Modifying Student's August 13, 2026, Subpoena Duces Tecum to District Custodian of RecordsOAH ordered Irvine to allow Student's experts longer classroom observations, ruling that the district's blanket one-hour, one-observer policy does not provide the equivalent opportunity the law requires. OAH also consolidated the cases over Student's objection.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Mary McGrail, NAPA Center, Dr. Ballinger, and Rady Children's Hospital of Orange County, and Denying Motion to Quash as to Dr. Hussain and Dr. Waldron as MootOAH quashed four of Irvine's subpoenas for Student's private provider and hospital records because the subpoenas used boilerplate language and never showed the records were reasonably necessary; two others were withdrawn.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash Culver City's Subpoenas Duces Tecum in Part, and Modifying Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH narrowed Culver City's subpoenas to Student's two private providers, finding them overbroad and a threat to medical privacy, but allowed records tied to reimbursement claims and the IEPs at issue.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH limited Union's subpoena for Parent's records to April 1, 2025 through June 8, 2026, because Union never justified older or later records, but otherwise required Parent to produce them.
- Order Denying Motion for Protective OrderOAH denied Student's request for Parent to pre-screen and redact records subpoenaed by Union, finding existing procedures already route subpoenaed records to the ALJ, not the parties, before hearing.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's records subpoena to Escondido in full. The subpoena set a prehearing production date, the attorney's declaration was unsigned, and it did not show the reasonable necessity the special education regulation requires.
- Order Granting in Part Student's Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH narrowed Union's subpoenas for Student's physician, therapist, and Sutter Health records to education-related and specific diagnosis records through the complaint filing date, finding requests for "all" records overbroad.
- Order Granting in Part, and Denying in Part, Motions to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed Student's subpoenas for all communications about Student because the supporting declarations gave only conclusory claims of reasonable necessity. Both Respondents must still produce documents showing which agency was responsible for special education in 2024-2025.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel District's Response to Due Process Complaint as MootOAH denied Student's motion to compel Folsom-Cordova's response to the due process complaint as moot because the district filed and served its response the day after the motion was filed.
- Order Denying Student's First and Second Motions to Quash SubpoenasOAH denied Parent's motions to quash subpoenas to Student's father. The spousal privilege not to testify does not apply because Parent is not a party, and the father communicated directly with the schools.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum and Modifying Subpoena for Testimony for Marianne AckerlandOAH quashed Student's records subpoena to a contracted school nurse as overly broad and unsupported by a showing of necessity, but upheld her testimony subpoena as properly served and reset her appearance date.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena for Dana Moran and Modifying SubpoenaOAH partly granted Vista Oaks' motion to quash a subpoena for staff member Dana Moran. The records were reasonably necessary to Student's confidentiality claim, but the requests were overly broad and lacked a time limit.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Attorney Debra FerdmanOAH quashed Student's subpoena seeking assessment reports from Vista Oaks' attorney because it showed no reasonable necessity or materiality, and the attorney did not possess the records.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Luis Diaz, Steven Ybarra, Alejandro Olmos, and Cynthia HartshornOAH quashed four Student subpoenas for Riverside administrators' records because they demanded production before hearing despite the ALJ's warning, were overbroad and vague, lacked a showing of necessity, and were served too late.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Vista Oaks' late motion to quash Student's eight subpoenas because it missed the motion cut-off without good cause, and its counsel had agreed by email to accept subpoenas for staff.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum on Steven YbarraOAH quashed Student's subpoena for a principal's emails and records because the template requests were overbroad, irrelevant to the narrow expedited issue, and improper prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum on Gerardo ArenasOAH quashed Student's subpoena for Riverside's program coordinator's records. Student's template declaration did not show the broad categories of communications were reasonably necessary for the narrow expedited issue.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum on Michael D'AmicoOAH quashed Student's subpoena for a Riverside special education coordinator's records because Student's template declaration failed to show the broad categories of documents were reasonably necessary for the narrow expedited issue.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum on Danielle SovineOAH quashed Student's subpoena for an assistant principal's records because Student's template declaration did not show the broad categories of documents were reasonably necessary for the narrow expedited issue.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel a Response to the ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel Fremont Unified to respond to the due process complaint as moot because District filed and served its response the same day the motion was filed.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena, in PartOAH quashed 22 of Student's 23 subpoena requests as overbroad, vague, or lacking a showing of reasonable necessity. Palo Alto must still produce two years of service delivery logs and progress monitoring data.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash, in Part as Student's Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH partly granted Berkeley's motion to quash Student's records subpoena, finding it timely but overbroad, and narrowed it to the statutory period and to records without open-ended communications requests.
- Order Granting Motion, in Part to Quash SubpoenaOAH partly quashed Berkeley's subpoenas to Student's private schools. It limited dates to enrollment plus two months, narrowed correspondence and mental health requests to educational matters, and quashed requests for privileged advocate communications.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Documents in Addition to Educational Records ProducedOAH denied Student's motion to compel Chowchilla to produce records on the length of class removals and lost instructional time, because Chowchilla swore no such educational records exist beyond those already produced.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Production of RecordsOAH denied Student's second motion to compel occupational therapy records because it was filed late without good cause, repeated an already-denied request, and did not show that more records existed.
- Order Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Student's motion to compel Milpitas to give Student's independent inclusion assessor records, staff interviews, and six hours of observation, finding Milpitas's two-hour observation offer exceeded its own assessor's 80 minutes.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH partly granted Irvine's motion to modify Student's subpoena for school surveillance videos. Production was moved to the first hearing day because there is no right to prehearing discovery, but Irvine must still produce the March 4, 2026 video.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Student's Requests for Production of DocumentsOAH quashed Student's two document production requests because Government Code section 11507.6 discovery does not apply to special education due process hearings, which allow only limited prehearing discovery.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH denied Parent's motion to compel and her request for reconsideration because the requested documents were overly burdensome, were not education records, and were irrelevant to Student's issues.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum in full. It was directed to an individual rather than District's custodian of records, was overbroad, and did not show reasonable necessity for each document.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed District's subpoena for a private behavior evaluator's records because District gave only general, conclusory reasons and never showed each requested document was reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed San Mateo Foster City's subpoena for Student's private in-home ABA records because the district never showed how those records were material to whether its school behavior services were appropriate.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH denied without prejudice Student's oral prehearing motion to make San Diego identify and produce all staff who might provide Home Hospital services, finding it untimely and premature, and set a videoconference hearing.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum to a Stockton Unified staff member because the only supporting declaration was the form subpoena's one-sentence statement of reasonable necessity.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Oakland's Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH largely upheld Student's subpoenas to Oakland for communications, substitute-teacher records, and school sign-in/out logs, but limited them to the statutory period ending November 25, 2025, and to records about Student only.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Simi Valley's motion to quash Student's subpoena of a school principal because his testimony was shown to be relevant and material, though the ALJ may later limit it.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for records from Poway Unified's special education director because it sought production before the hearing, and there is no right to prehearing discovery in due process cases.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to District and Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to City CollegeOAH quashed Student's subpoena for Glendale's records as improper prehearing discovery lacking reasonable necessity, but refused to quash Student's subpoena to Pasadena City College because Glendale lacked standing.
- Order Denying Request to Compel Response for Educational RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to compel Poway Unified to respond to educational records requests because Student attached neither the records request nor a supporting declaration, but Student may refile.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum and Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena for TestimonyOAH ordered Glendale to produce Student's unproduced education records and communications on discipline and special education requests, but quashed Student's testimony subpoena because it named only generic "District Staff."
- Order Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Student's motion to compel Sweetwater to produce native-format Infinite Campus records and metadata, finding no authority requires metadata and Parent already had complete PDF copies of the educational record.
2025
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Supplemental Document ProductionOAH denied Student's motion to compel supplemental document production from Los Angeles because special education due process cases allow no prehearing discovery beyond the five-business-day evidence exchange.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Production of Educational RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to compel educational records because Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified produced them on time, and no law requires records to be organized, chronological, or free of extra documents.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel, Deeming the Discovery Request a Parental Request for Educational Records, and Ordering Los Angeles to Timely Provide Parent With a Copy of Student's Educational RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to compel prehearing discovery because special education due process allows none, but treated the document request as a parental records request and ordered Los Angeles to produce records within five business days.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Carondelet High School; Order Modifying Date and Time for Production of RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to quash Mt. Diablo Unified's subpoena for private school records. Student sought tuition reimbursement for that school, so the records were reasonably necessary and limited to the two-year claim period.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash San Diego's subpoena for records from the private school where Student was unilaterally placed. Student seeks reimbursement and nonpublic school placement, so the records may be necessary.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash and Modifying Subpoena Duces TecumOAH narrowed Student's subpoena to emails and internal communications about Student's mental health and transition needs, and quashed requests for district policies as not material after Student withdrew related issues.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel ObservationOAH denied Student's request to force Hueneme to let his independent evaluator observe him at middle school, because the IEE was already finished and the evaluator had an equivalent observation opportunity.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena and Modifying Return DateOAH denied Chula Vista's motion to quash Student's records subpoena, finding the request for documents naming Student or Parents over two years narrowly tailored and supported by a showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Granting Motions to Quash Subpoenas to Ashley Koedel and Anna CenciosoOAH quashed Pacifica's records subpoenas to two private providers because they demanded production only 13 days after service, short of the 15-day minimum under the Code of Civil Procedure.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash Three Subpoenas Duces Tecum Issued by DistrictOAH quashed three Pacifica subpoenas for Student's private provider records because they sought three school years of broad records when only one IEP was at issue, and the supporting declarations showed no specific necessity.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Positive DevelopmentOAH quashed Carlsbad's subpoena for Student's private ABA provider records because Student disclaimed any behavior-related claims or reimbursement, so the district's declaration of necessity no longer showed the records were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to CarlsbadOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum to Carlsbad because it sought voluminous records, many outside the issues for hearing, with no declaration showing they were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel Compliance With Subpoena Duces Tecum on Sanderling Waldorf SchoolOAH ordered Sanderling Waldorf School to produce Student's records under Carlsbad's subpoena. A private school cannot refuse because it is under-resourced, but OAH narrowed the subpoena to the remaining claims and deleted one overbroad category.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash in Part Subpoena to Jason MillsOAH quashed Student's subpoena request for two years of a special education director's emails about Student as overbroad and unsupported, but ordered production of emails about pass/no pass grading decisions.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas for Nancy Aliff, Yolanda Alvidrez, Naima Jones, Tabitha Obligacion, Akira Tajima, and Jeffrey WahlOAH denied Monrovia Unified's motion to quash Student's subpoenas for six nonpublic agency assessors, finding their testimony relevant to the IEP offer and the subpoenas timely after the District dropped them as witnesses.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for staff notes and district communications about a disciplinary incident. Student's declaration did not show the records were reasonably necessary, and Student filed no response to the motion.
- Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Student's Motion to Compel Production of DocumentsOAH ordered Ojai Unified to produce any remaining education records by October 15, 2025, but denied Student's request for documents that are not education records, because special education cases do not allow prehearing discovery.
- Order for Milpitas Unified to Produce Individualized Education Program DocumentsOAH ordered Milpitas to produce signed copies of three IEPs because none of the IEPs Parent submitted with Student's stay put motion were signed, and the last consented-to IEP was central to the dispute.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Nicole MosherOAH quashed Ojai's subpoena for Nicole Mosher's documents because it was served too late to allow reasonable time to comply and Ojai never showed reasonable necessity for the records.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for San Mateo's communications, tests, and assignments because it lacked a good-cause declaration, sought pre-hearing discovery, was overbroad, and gave only three days' notice.
- Order Granting YMCA of Silicon Valley's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Sabrina IppolitoOAH quashed Student's subpoena to a YMCA executive director because the nonparty witness was never personally served and did not agree to electronic service.
- Order Granting YMCA of Silicon Valley's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Jennifer VirruetaOAH quashed Student's subpoena to a YMCA assistant site director because she was not personally served and neither she nor YMCA agreed to electronic service.
- Order Granting YMCA of Silicon Valley's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Ranferis MartinezOAH quashed Student's subpoena to a YMCA program director because nonparty witnesses must be personally served, and the witness neither received personal service nor agreed to electronic service.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Without PrejudiceOAH denied Riverside's motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum without prejudice because Riverside never provided a copy of the subpoena it wanted quashed.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed all ten of Student's subpoenas duces tecum to Mill Valley staff because they demanded documents before hearing, which amounts to barred prehearing discovery, and were served only 15 days before hearing.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed seven Student subpoenas duces tecum to District staff and its records custodian. The subpoenas demanded documents before hearing, were overbroad, and lacked a specific showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH denied Student's motions to add an issue and to compel documents because they were filed late and Student could not show good cause; the hearing on Simi Valley's evaluation was set.
- Order Denying Motion to Dismiss Issues for Lack of JurisdictionOAH denied Parent's motion to make Alhambra Unified send records to Los Angeles Unified for a transfer, and refused to hear a retaliation claim, because both are outside OAH's jurisdiction.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Adelanto's records subpoenas to Student's independent assessors because Adelanto never served Student the Notice to Consumer required for subpoenas of personal records.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference and Partially Granting Motion to QuashOAH partially granted Sanger's motion to quash Student's subpoena for district communications, finding the request overbroad and the statement of necessity conclusory, but ordered production of narrowed IEP-team emails.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash in Part as Student's Subpoenas Duces Tecum Issued July 31, 2025 and August 4, 2025OAH partly quashed Student's subpoenas for school records and test manuals, finding them untimely and overbroad, but ordered Palm Springs to produce limited work samples and the scoring chapters of four assessment manuals.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Central Unified's motion to quash Student's subpoena for response-to-intervention communications, finding the records reasonably necessary to Student's parental participation claim and not overly broad.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's five subpoenas for district staff records because they sought prehearing discovery, had no declarations showing reasonable necessity, and were not properly served, without prejudice to reissuing.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH denied Student's motion to quash Palo Alto Unified's subpoena to Hope Technology School, finding the records material to placement and reimbursement, but ordered redaction of other students' information.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena and Modifying Date of ProductionOAH denied Student's motion to quash Riverside's subpoenas for an independent evaluator's notes and protocols, finding them potentially material, but moved production to the first day of hearing because there is no prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Without Prejudice Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied without prejudice Student's motion to quash Adelanto's subpoenas for independent evaluation records because Student did not provide complete, authenticated copies of the subpoenas.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Student's SubpoenasOAH quashed all of Student's witness and document subpoenas to Murrieta Valley employees because none were signed by an attorney or judicial officer and all were served by email without the recipients' agreement.
- Order Granting Student's Motion Requiring Santa Cruz City Schools to File a Response to ComplaintOAH ordered Santa Cruz to file a response to Student's due process complaint by July 31, 2025, because it missed the 10-day deadline and did not oppose Student's motion.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash July 10, 2025, SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for district training and IEP implementation records because it was served only 12 days before the expedited hearing and lacked a declaration showing reasonable necessity.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash July 8, 2025, SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's records subpoena to Manhattan Beach's special education director because it was served too late before the expedited hearing and its declaration did not show reasonable necessity.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Production of Documents and District Employees and Contractor Personnel InformationOAH denied Student's request to force Cupertino to produce emails, attendance records, and personal and personnel information on 65 potential witnesses, because special education cases do not allow general pre-hearing discovery.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Names of Aides and Paraprofessionals Without PrejudiceOAH denied without prejudice Student's motion to compel Mill Valley to name the aides who supported Student, finding it premature prehearing discovery, which IDEA and California law do not allow.
- Order Granting Fremont Unified School District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Michelle Quintero, Andrea Chase, and Joanna HaasOAH 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.
- Order Granting Fremont Unified School District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Aaron Placke, Emily Dinh, Emily Ibarra-Zuniga, and Nicole SbargiaOAH quashed Student's records subpoenas to four teachers. Most requested records were not reasonably necessary, and the needed records were already covered by a modified subpoena to the school director.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Parents' subpoenas for records in an expedited case because they did not show reasonable necessity and gave only one business day to produce, but ordered Cupertino to provide education records by June 4.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel ObservationsOAH ordered Los Angeles to let Student's privately retained evaluator observe Student at school for up to 60 minutes by June 6, 2025, because Education Code section 56329 gives independent evaluators an equivalent observation opportunity.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum because it sought interrogatories and civil-style discovery not allowed in special education hearings, and Student never showed reasonable necessity for the documents.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference and Granting, in Part, Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed Student's subpoenas to nine witnesses who had no role in Simi Valley's March 2025 assessment, but upheld the subpoena to the assessor who helped conduct it, in a district-filed IEE case.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference, Granting Motion to Dismiss Issue, and Denying as Moot Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Palo Alto's motion to quash Student's witness-address subpoena as moot. It ordered Palo Alto to produce current employees and to accept service for, or give contact information for, former employees. It also dismissed Student's Section 504/ADA claims.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Carlsbad Unified's subpoena for an independent assessor's records because the supporting affidavit was vague and conclusory and the subpoena was premature, but District may serve a properly tailored new one.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel District to Contract With Student's Chosen Independent Educational Evaluation Assessor, Allow Assessor Access to a Los Angeles Educational Site or Program, and Produce Educational RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to make Los Angeles fund her chosen IEE assessor above its cost cap before hearing, because special education law has no summary judgment and the issue is already in the complaint.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Compliance With SubpoenasOAH denied Student's motion to compel compliance with witness and records subpoenas because they were never served on the witnesses and the motion was premature, since IDEA provides no prehearing discovery right.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash the Subpoenas of Kennetha Stevens and Michelle RodriguezOAH quashed Student's subpoenas to Stockton's board president and superintendent because the supporting declarations were conclusory and did not show reasonable necessity for their testimony or documents.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash San Diego's subpoenas for independent evaluators' records, finding them reasonably necessary, narrowly tailored to the two IEEs central to Student's claims, and not improper prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Student's motion to compel Palo Alto to give contact information for three former employees on Student's witness list, because Student cited no legal authority supporting the request.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference, Granting Motion to Continue Prehearing Conference and Hearing, and Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena, as MootOAH continued the hearing because Capistrano Unified's attorney is on medical leave, but rejected its request for a mid-May date. It denied as moot the District's motion to quash because Student withdrew the subpoena.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for county child welfare records about Student and his siblings because Student did not show the records were material and relevant to any issue in the case.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Compton's motion to quash Student's subpoena for IEP-related communications, finding the request targeted to IEP team members and providers on specific topics, not overbroad or impermissible discovery.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference, Denying Request to Add Sub-Issue 2d, and Quashing Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for two years of district communications because the declaration did not show reasonable necessity, and refused to add an issue Student admitted was left out of the complaint.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena in PartOAH narrowed Student's records subpoena to San Diego, finding it overly broad and lacking reasonable necessity except for documents tied to predetermination and Student's needs, and quashed it as to other students' records.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Video Conference; Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint; and Order Deeming Motion to Compel Production of Records as MootOAH granted Student's unopposed motion to amend the complaint and ruled Student's motion to compel records moot because it was tied to the original complaint that the amendment replaced.
2024
- Order for Delayed Production of Subpoenaed DocumentsOAH gave Palo Alto until December 27, 2024 to produce subpoenaed emails because of their huge volume, but required daily rolling production and ordered staff records searched in the areas still at issue.
- Order Granting Motions to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed Student's records subpoena to San Diego and San Diego's six subpoenas to third parties because both sides argued relevance and materiality instead of the required showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for records from San Jose. The subpoena showed no reasonable necessity, its "any and all" request had no date range and was overbroad, and it amounted to improper prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting, in Part, and Denying, in Part, Student's Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH partly quashed Clovis' subpoenas to Student's three independent evaluators. Their test protocols, observation notes, and communications with Parent and District staff must be produced, but not their drafts, attorney communications, or billing records.
- Order Granting in Part District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum of District Witnesses Denying Student's Motion to Shorten Time for Compliance With SubpoenaOAH narrowed, but did not quash, Student's document subpoenas to ten Palo Alto staff. Student had fixed the timing and necessity defects by re-issuing them, but two requests were too broad.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena of Palo Alto as an Entity and Order Denying Motion to Shorten TimeOAH quashed five of Student's subpoena requests to Palo Alto, covering tracking software and provider caseloads, for lack of reasonable necessity, upheld the rest, and denied Student's motion to shorten time because the reissued subpoena cured untimeliness.
- Order Partially Granting and Partially Denying Motion to CompelOAH ordered Old Adobe to produce Student's response-to-intervention records within three days to the extent they are education records, but denied pre-hearing discovery of other RTI documents.
- Order Denying Motion for Records; Order Denying Motion for Copies of Procedural Safeguards and to Assign an Individual to Review the Procedural Safeguards with ParentOAH denied Student's motions to compel IEP records and recordings, a copy of procedural safeguards, and an assigned person to explain them, because Santa Monica-Malibu Unified showed it already provided records and safeguards.
- Order Denying Motion for Records; Order Denying Motion for Copies of Procedural Safeguards and to Assign an Individual to Review the Procedural Safeguards With ParentOAH denied Student's motions to compel IEP records and recordings, a copy of procedural safeguards, and a staff person to review safeguards, because Santa Monica-Malibu Unified showed it had already provided them.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Production of Documents and Contact Information for District EmployeesOAH denied Student's motion to compel Palo Alto to produce records, employee contact information, and all 30 witnesses on the first two hearing days, finding Student cited no legal authority for the requests.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Granting Motion for Continuance and Setting Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing; Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum; Order Denying Student's Motion to Place Student in a Specific Classroom; Order Denying Student's Motion to Seal the RecordsOAH quashed Parent's subpoena for records from 25 district staff because it was not served, showed no reasonable necessity, and amounted to prehearing discovery. OAH also denied classroom-placement and sealing requests and continued the hearing.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for 30 categories of Compton records in full because the subpoena's declaration of reasonable necessity was left blank and Student never showed the records were material.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH ordered Los Angeles Unified to produce Student's education records requested by Parent's subpoena, but quashed the subpoena for any other documents because Parent's declaration did not show reasonable necessity.
- Order Granting Motion to Deny Student's Records RequestOAH denied Student's motion to make Santa Monica-Malibu Unified produce records because Student served no subpoena duces tecum showing reasonable necessity, and records beyond the educational file would be impermissible prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting Motion to Deny Student's Records RequestOAH denied Student's request to order Santa Monica-Malibu Unified to produce IEP recordings, assessments, and communications because Student served no subpoena duces tecum with a declaration, and pre-hearing production would be impermissible discovery.
- Order Denying Pacific Grove Unified School District's Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Pacific Grove's motions to quash Student's document subpoenas as moot because they called for production before the continued hearing date, and there is no right to prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for district child find records because it named no recipient, demanded production before the hearing, and showed no reasonable necessity.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Granting Riverside's Motion to Amend; and Ordering a Meet and Confer and Production of Educational RecordsOAH ordered Riverside to meet and confer and re-produce Student's educational records in a readable, organized format after a disorganized production, and granted Riverside's unopposed motion to amend, resetting all timelines.
- Corrected Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Capistrano's subpoena to The Prentice School because the records were relevant to Student's reimbursement claim, tailored to the time period at issue, and not overbroad.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Capistrano's subpoena for private school records, finding the district showed reasonable necessity because Student seeks reimbursement for the private placement.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum as MootOAH denied Student's motion to quash San Diego's subpoenas duces tecum as moot because consolidating the cases vacated the September 17, 2024 hearing date the documents were due by.
- Order Granting in Part Motion of Tamalpais Union High School District to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed seven of Student's nine subpoenas to Tamalpais staff but required the evaluating school psychologist to testify and two staff to produce narrowed records tied to the evaluation Kentfield added to the record.
- Order Granting and Denying in Parts Oral Motion to Quash the Time Frame of Angelia Watkins Subpoena Duces Tecum Based on Student's August 12, 2024 Withdrawal of IssuesOAH refused to cut San Diego's subpoenaed records off at March 7, 2023, but limited production to February 3 through June 15, 2023, the only period Student still sought remedies for.
- Order Granting and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum of Christy Himstreet, Crystal Ruse, Serena Saake, and Jill WeckerlyOAH mostly denied Student's motion to quash La Mesa's subpoenas to Student's independent evaluators, ordering them to produce their communications with Student's attorneys and their retainer and payment records, which bear on bias.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference; Denying Motions to QuashOAH denied Los Angeles' motions to quash subpoenas for four witnesses, without prejudice. Student said their testimony bears on the services provided and the remedies requested, and the district may still object at hearing.
- Order Quashing Student's Third Set of SubpoenasOAH quashed Student's third set of five witness subpoenas because they were improperly served, had already been quashed, called for testimony on impossible dates, and gave witnesses unreasonably short notice.
- Order Quashing Student's SubpoenasOAH quashed two sets of Student's witness subpoenas because neither was properly served: the district's counsel never agreed to accept service, and staff never agreed to email service.
- Order Granting Student's Request for Names and Contact Information for Potential WitnessesOAH ordered District to give Student the full names and emails of staff who worked with him at an interim placement, because Student must know witnesses' identities to compel their attendance at hearing.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel Response to ComplaintOAH ordered West Contra Costa Unified to serve and file its response to Student's due process complaint within three business days because no response had been filed, as federal law requires.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena to Salinas' superintendent because the supporting declaration was conclusory and failed to show reasonable necessity for his testimony or each category of documents.
- Order Quashing Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Clovis's subpoenas duces tecum as moot because they called for documents at a June 11 hearing that had been continued to September, but allowed Clovis to reissue them.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel ResponseOAH ordered Soquel to file a response to Student's due process complaint within three business days, because its notice of insufficiency did not excuse a response once issues were found sufficient.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Fremont's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Avanija KomarrajuOAH partly quashed Parents' subpoena, requiring the speech provider to produce Student's speech work samples and service logs but not general instructional materials, which Parents did not show were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash District's Subpoena Duces Tecum to the Custodian of Records of Read AcademyOAH quashed Twin Rivers' subpoena for Student's private school records because it was served by mail only nine days before hearing, far short of the time the Code of Civil Procedure requires.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Fremont's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Brian SingletonOAH partly quashed Parents' subpoena. It ordered production of Student's PE curriculum frameworks and progress reports, which bear on the PE implementation claim, but quashed requests for PE minutes data for lack of shown necessity.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Fremont's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Bashir GouharyOAH narrowed Parents' subpoena to Student's teacher, requiring curriculum frameworks, Student's work, and Student's injury reports, but quashing requests for other instructional materials, blank worksheets, and classroom-wide biting data.
- Order Granting in Part, and Denying in Part, District's Motion to Quash Student's Subpoena Duces Tecum to DistrictOAH narrowed but largely enforced Student's subpoena for Twin Rivers staff communications, finding the records reasonably necessary to the IEP and FAPE issues while cutting the extended school year request and the open-ended timeframe.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Ian SquibbOAH quashed Parents' subpoena for fifth-grade general education schedules from a teacher who never taught Student, because the stated reason was not an issue pled in the complaint.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Fremont's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Rowena CowenOAH ordered Fremont to produce Student's two injury incident reports but quashed Parents' requests for district-wide biting and injury data, finding them overbroad and not tied to Student's hearing issues.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Fremont's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Courtney StonesiferOAH partly quashed Parents' subpoena to an occupational therapist, ordering production of Student's OT work samples and service logs but quashing the request for OT instructional materials as not reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Fremont's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Heidi RuscherOAH narrowed Parents' subpoena to Heidi Ruscher, ordering production of modified and general education science curriculum frameworks and progress reports but quashing the request for all other instructional materials as unsupported.
- Order Modifying and Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena in PartOAH partly quashed Fontana's subpoena for Student's Loma Linda medical records. It limited production to the two-year complaint period and barred clinical medical records because Student had not put her full medical history at issue.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Information of School Employees, Without PrejudiceOAH denied, without prejudice, Student's unopposed motion to compel Fremont to disclose school employees' last names and emails, because the IDEA gives no right to prehearing discovery and the request was premature.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Dr. Lisa DavidsonOAH quashed only the part of Classical Academy's subpoena seeking Student's attorneys' protected work product and ordered Student's independent evaluator to produce everything else, finding the records reasonably necessary and not overbroad.
- Order Granting in Part Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Dr. Suzanne Smith Roley, Christy Himstreet, and Erin Sensibaugh and Modifying SubpoenasOAH quashed only the parts of Classical Academy's subpoenas to Student's independent evaluators that sought attorney work product, and ordered the evaluators to produce all other records about Student.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Janice Medina, Dana Moen, and Custodian of Records for Classical Academy and Modifying SubpoenasOAH refused to quash Student's records subpoenas on bullying and the responsible-agency question, finding them necessary and not overbroad, but moved the production date because the notice was too short.
- Order Granting in Part Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Fusion Academy TeachersOAH quashed Classical Academy's document subpoenas to seven Fusion Academy teachers because similar records were already subpoenaed from Fusion's administrators and records custodian, but kept the subpoenas in force for testimony.
- Order Granting in Part, and Denying in Part, Student's Motion to Quash Eight Subpoenas Duces Tecum Issued by DistrictOAH quashed Menlo Park's subpoenas to Lindamood-Bell as irrelevant and narrowed overbroad document demands, but required the private school teachers to testify and the private psychologist to produce records.
- Order Granting in Part, and Denying in Part, District's Motion to Quash Student's Subpoena Duces Tecum to District's Custodian of RecordsOAH narrowed but largely enforced Student's subpoena for Menlo Park District staff communications, finding them reasonably necessary and unavailable through a records request, while striking the overbroad 'any and all communications' wording.
- Order Granting, in Part, Motions to Quash SubpoenasOAH partly quashed Student's 45 subpoenas to Clovis Unified staff as an overbroad "shotgun" approach, limiting documents to post-enrollment dates and testifying witnesses, and quashed the request for staff training records.
- Order Granting in Part Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum for Marianne Hughes, Megan Sullivan, and the Custodian of Records for Fusion Academy and Modifying SubpoenasOAH kept Classical Academy's subpoenas for Fusion Academy records but moved the production date to the first hearing day, because the original deadline gave too little time and amounted to impermissible prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed San Carlos's subpoena for records from another district's special education director because the hearing had been continued, making the April production date improper prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH mostly upheld Student's records subpoena in an expedited discipline case, ordering Burton to produce behavior, mental health, attendance, video, restraint, and transfer records, but quashed requests unrelated to expedited issues.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash in Part and Modifying Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH narrowed, but did not quash, Mount Diablo's subpoenas for Student's private provider and medical records, limiting them to feeding-related records because Student placed his feeding disorder at issue.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed five Gilroy subpoenas duces tecum because the district's supporting affidavits gave only conclusory, circular statements and failed to show reasonable necessity for the documents sought.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas of Abby Rozenberg, Darren Barber, and Dr. Jenss ChangOAH quashed Riverside's subpoenas for records from three evaluators and a Whittier staff member because they demanded production a month before hearing, and there is no right to prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Amanda JohnstonOAH quashed two subpoenas duces tecum Student issued to El Monte's own attorney of record, finding the district's counsel an improper witness and the subpoenas an impermissible demand for prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena for R. TejedaOAH denied Student's motion to quash Ukiah's subpoena for evaluator Raul Tejeda's records. Ukiah had not shown the records were needed, but Student filed the motion after the prehearing deadline without good cause.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Conejo Valley's motion to compel a more detailed response to its complaint, because the IDEA has no provision letting a filing party challenge the sufficiency of the other side's response.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel and Request for ContinuanceOAH denied Student's motion to compel Rialto Unified staff to complete a private assessor's rating scales, interviews, and records requests, and denied a one-week continuance, because no law requires that cooperation beyond observation.
- Order Modifying Subpoena Duces Tecum and Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Fontana Unified's motion to quash Student's subpoena for district communications about Student, holding Student, not district employees, is the consumer, but moved the production date by one day.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference Denying Motion to Continue, Denying Motion to Consolidate, Denying Motion to Dismiss, Granting Motion to Quash, and Denying Request for In-Person HearingOAH quashed Riverside's subpoena for a private evaluator's records because Riverside served no timely Notice to Consumer and showed no reasonable necessity. It also denied Riverside's settlement-based dismissal motion and Student's in-person hearing request.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Resolution Session or, Alternatively, to Set the Hearing DateOAH denied Student's motion to compel a resolution session or set the hearing date as premature, because Student filed it while the 15-day resolution session period was still running.
- Order Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Student's motion to compel Santa Monica-Malibu to produce education records, finding it sought improper prehearing discovery, which is not available in special education due process cases.
2023
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena and Denying Student's Motion to Modify SubpoenaOAH quashed nine of Student's subpoenas for records about an April 2023 disciplinary incident because the expedited hearing will not look at the underlying facts of the incident.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena as MootOAH denied Student's motion to quash Sequoia Union's subpoena for a private psychologist's records as moot because the District withdrew its records request before the expedited hearing.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH refused to quash Student's subpoena for Fremont's February 2021 504 plan meeting records, finding them potentially relevant to Student's attempt to extend the statute of limitations on Child Find claims.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference, Order Granting Motion to Amend, Order to Unconsolidate, and Denying Motion to QuashOAH denied Clovis's motion to quash Student's subpoena for staff emails and correspondence, finding them reasonably necessary because they are not school records and can only be obtained by subpoena.
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH partly quashed Student's records subpoena to San Diego Unified. It limited emails and documents to the February 3 to August 18, 2023 claim period, excluded privileged communications, and struck the request for service logs.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference, and Denying Motion to QuashOAH denied Student's motion to quash Oakland's subpoena for records from Student's current charter school. Those records bear on Student's request for a prospective nonpublic school placement, and the subpoena covered only a short period.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Compel Production of DocumentsOAH ordered Capistrano to produce the education records it admitted it had withheld, but refused to compel emails and other documents never placed in Student's single cumulative or permanent file.
- Order Granting, in Part, Motion to Quash Subpoena and Modifying SubpoenaOAH refused to quash Student's subpoena for a district administrator's emails and service logs but narrowed it to a two-year window and to matters about Student's identification, assessment, placement, or FAPE.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Alpine's subpoenas for private providers' and a private school's records, finding the subpoenas showed reasonable necessity and were not improper prehearing discovery.
- Order Partially Granting Motion to Compel ObservationOAH let Palo Alto observe Student at his private nonpublic school because Parents seek public funding for that placement, but limited each observer to one 50-minute session with no more than two observers at a time.
- Order Granting and Denying in Parts the Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's pre-hearing document subpoena to Fremont's special education director but required Fremont's attorney to testify as a percipient witness about IEP team meetings she attended.
- Order Granting in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Pacific Grove's subpoena to Chartwell School only for medical, mental health, and behavioral records, finding reasonable necessity shown for education, progress, communication, and tuition/payment records tied to Student's reimbursement claim.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena as MootOAH denied a private school's motion to quash a district subpoena as moot because Student's amended complaint vacated the hearing dates, so all subpoenas must be reissued and re-served.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Granting Request for Continuance, Denying Motion for 45 Day Hearing Timeline and Denying Motions to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumsOAH granted Salinas's request to continue the hearing over Student's objection because three essential witnesses were unavailable. Student's 45-day timeline motion and the motions to quash subpoenas were denied as moot.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH ordered Student's two expert witnesses to produce subpoenaed records and communications with Student's attorneys. The ALJ will first review them privately to screen out any protected attorney work product before Long Beach sees them.
- Order Granting Long Beach's Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for 'any and all' Long Beach communications about Student. The request was overbroad and burdensome, and Student did not show reasonable necessity with a detailed declaration.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena to Juniper Psychology Group Without Prejudice Pending ALJ In Camera Review of Produced RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to quash Cambrian's subpoena for private psychologist records without prejudice, finding them needed to cross-examine Student's expert, but ordered in camera ALJ review before use.
- Order Directing District to Produce Additional Education RecordsOAH ordered Mt. Diablo to produce aide and speech assistant notes sent to supervisors to track Student's goal progress, finding they were education records even though not kept in a central file.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Issued for Jennifer SmithOAH quashed Student's subpoena for the Director of Special Education's records because it sought documents on issues not in the complaint, was overbroad, and covered service logs already requested.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Issued to Terri LopezOAH denied Salinas's motion to quash Student's subpoena for records from the school principal because the supporting declaration addressed a different subpoena, not the one to the principal.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's revised subpoena of a special education case manager because its date range, November 1, 2023 to March 31, 2023, was nonsensical, even though Student showed reasonable necessity for implementation-related records.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Yisell LopezOAH quashed Student's subpoena for a school psychologist's records because Student did not show reasonable necessity, and the requests were overbroad, burdensome, and reached beyond the issue in the complaint.
- Order Granting, in Part, Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for weekly session reports because it did not show reasonable necessity, but ordered Mt. Diablo to produce any such reports that are education records within three business days.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Discovery and Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH denied Student's motion to compel and quashed Student's subpoenas to Mount Diablo because the subpoenas did not show reasonable necessity and special education hearings allow only limited prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas, as MootOAH denied Student's motion to quash Newark's subpoenas as moot because Student's second amended complaint reset the hearing timelines, and the subpoenas sought records for the old hearing date.
- Order Following Expedited Prehearing Conference Dismissing Expedited Issues Without Prejudice; Order Dismissing Issue 4 for Lack of Jurisdiction; Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH dismissed Student's expedited Issues 1-3 at Student's request and dismissed Issue 4, a challenge to an expulsion hearing, as outside OAH's jurisdiction. It denied Student's motion to quash as moot after Julian Union withdrew its subpoenas.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed Walnut Valley's subpoenas duces tecum to Student's outside providers because, after the hearing was continued, the subpoenas impermissibly demanded records before the hearing.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference, Granting Request for Continuance of Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing and Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Palm Springs Unified's motion to quash Student's subpoena for documents because the district did not attach the subpoena, and an incomplete proof of service is not a valid reason to quash.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Bella Mente's subpoena for Sheriff's Department records and a detective's testimony about Student. Juvenile police records require a juvenile court petition (form JV-575), and OAH lacks jurisdiction to compel their release.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel Classroom ObservationOAH ordered Chino Valley to let Student's private experts observe Student's classroom, because California law gives students this right even when the observation is not part of an independent educational evaluation.
2022
- Order Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum and Modifying SubpoenaOAH narrowed Student's subpoena to the special education director, requiring only his written communications with Monterey County Office of Education about Student's placement for a limited date range.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel ObservationOAH denied Monterey Peninsula's motion to observe Student at his private school because the request named no observer, time limit, or reason, making it improper prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumsOAH denied Student's motion to quash Apple Valley's subpoenas to four private providers, finding the records reasonably necessary to the district's defense and Student failed to show HIPAA or work-product protection.
- Order Denying Motions to Quash Subpoenas as Moot Due to Complaint AmendmentOAH denied Monterey Peninsula's motions to quash six Student subpoenas as moot, because Student's amended complaint replaced the original complaint and reset the hearing date the subpoenas were tied to.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference Granting Motion to Dismiss and Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Student's motion to compel a more detailed district response because no law requires a particular level of detail, and dismissed Section 504 and ADA claims for lack of jurisdiction.
- Order Granting, in Part, California School of the Deaf's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH partly granted CSD and CDE's motion to quash Student's subpoena for staff communications, upholding relevance but narrowing it to staff Student names plus Student's teachers and aides, January 2020 to May 2022.
- Order Granting Student's and District's Motions to Quash Subpoena in PartOAH narrowed San Dieguito's subpoenas for Student's medical records to what three testifying doctors relied on, quashed two others, and limited Student's subpoenas of top district administrators to the final hearing day.
- Order Compelling Production of Witness Caitlin Conheim's Notes Viewed in Preparation for TestimonyOAH ordered Carmel to give Student's attorney the personal notes a district witness reviewed before testifying, because Evidence Code section 771 requires production of writings used to refresh memory.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Rocklin's motion to quash Student's subpoena for staff communications about Student, finding the requests were tied to Student, the complaint's time period, and the issues set for hearing.
- Order Denying Without Prejudice Motion to Quash Two Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied without prejudice Long Beach District's motion to quash two subpoenas duces tecum to its superintendent because neither party gave OAH copies of the subpoenas or the supporting declarations.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash San Diego's subpoena for private school records because Student showed no standing to challenge a subpoena for a third party's records and offered no declarations supporting claimed privileges.
- Order to Produce Subpoenaed RecordsOAH ordered the Sacramento Police Department to comply with three District subpoenas for records in an expedited IDEA case, or else file a motion to quash explaining its refusal.
- Notice of No Action Regarding Objections to District's Subpoena Duces Tecum and Order Denying Request to Enforce ComplianceOAH denied Los Alamitos' request to order Prentice School to comply with a subpoena for records because OAH cannot enforce subpoenas; enforcement requires a contempt order from the Superior Court.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel Production and Ordering Parties to Meet and ConferOAH granted Sacramento's motion to compel Student's exhibits but gave Parent until August 29 to upload them or deliver paper copies to the District, because Parent lacked technology access to upload them.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Pajaro Valley Unified School District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum, and Modifying Subpoena Duces Tecum in PartOAH quashed Student's records subpoena for district policies, staff observation notes, and distance-learning records as irrelevant or overbroad, but required Pajaro Valley to produce Student-specific intervention, charter agreement, and Student Study Team records.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied an independent evaluator's motion to quash the District's subpoena for her records. The records were relevant to Student's assessment claims, and complying with a lawful subpoena does not violate HIPAA or FERPA.
- Further Order on Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH ordered the parties to tell all subpoena recipients immediately that OAH will not send document-upload invites until the subpoenas meet OAH filing requirements.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH mostly upheld Long Beach's eight records subpoenas to Student's providers and evaluators, quashing only billing, contract, and some attendance requests because Student sought no reimbursement for those services.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference, Order Dismissing Issues, and Order Denying Request to Compel a More Complete AnswerOAH denied Student's motion to compel a more complete answer because Goleta's response met minimal standards, and dismissed Student's unopposed ADA, Unruh Act, and Section 1983 claims for lack of jurisdiction.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Granting Student's Motion to Amend and Denying Stanislaus' Motion to Quash as MootOAH granted Student's unopposed motion to amend and denied Stanislaus County's motion to quash Student's document subpoena as moot, because the amended complaint resets all hearing timelines.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH narrowed Student's subpoena for District emails to named IEP team members and core topics from April 2020 on, and quashed the request for districtwide COVID-19 special education communications as irrelevant.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Progress Reports for 2020, 2021, and 2022, or State That the Reports Do Not ExistOAH denied Student's motion to compel progress reports because Long Beach stated in writing that it had produced all responsive educational records, and a district need not say whether a particular type of document exists.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for records to Stanislaus County because it set production for "the first day of hearing set by OAH" instead of a specific calendar date. Student may reissue it.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Mary Joyce EsquilloOAH quashed Student's subpoena for an evaluator's records because Student's supporting declaration only said the documents were relevant and did not explain in detail why they were material.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Claudi PerlinOAH quashed Student's subpoena for Claudia Perlin's service logs and communications because Student's declaration only generally claimed relevance and did not show in full detail why the records were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Renee BrazilOAH quashed Student's subpoena for an occupational therapist's records because Student's declaration only generally claimed relevance and did not show in detail why the documents were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Luisa LeachOAH quashed Student's subpoena for a provider's service logs and communications because Student's declaration only generally claimed relevance and did not show in full detail why the records were reasonably necessary.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Response to Initial Complaint as MootOAH denied Student's motion to compel Ventura to respond to the initial complaint as moot, because Ventura had since filed a response and an amended complaint replaced the original.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash a district subpoena for a private psychologist's correspondence with Parents and Student's attorney, because the psychologist was Parent-retained and designated as a testifying expert.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference and Denying Motion to Compel Teacher InterviewsOAH denied Student's request to make Stanislaus let Student's independent evaluators interview former teachers and staff, finding no legal authority that equates interviews with the classroom observation rights in Education Code section 56329.
- Order Denying Second Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum as UntimelyOAH denied Kentfield's motion to quash Student's subpoenas duces tecum to four staff, ruling that the Government Code's 20-day service rule does not apply to special education hearings.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Kentfield's motion to quash six document subpoenas served 14 days before hearing, ruling the 20-day Government Code service rule does not apply to special education hearings.
- Order Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Student's motion to compel Spanish translations of Whittier City's complaint, pleadings, and IEP documents. No IDEA or Education Code rule requires translated pleadings, and whether translations were owed is a hearing issue.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Response as MootOAH denied Student's motion to compel Dublin to respond to the due process complaint as moot because Dublin sent and filed its response after the motion was filed.
- Order Denying Motion to Strike and Motion to Compel a Further Response to Amended ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel a fuller district response, because no law lets a party challenge the sufficiency of a district's response. It also denied Northern Humboldt's motion to strike, because the disputed statement was not mediation-confidential.
- Order Granting Request for In Camera Review of Subpoena ResponseOAH granted Kaiser Permanente's request for in camera review of its subpoenaed medical records because Kaiser could not tell which records fit the narrowed subpoena; only responsive records will be released, redacted as needed.
- Order Granting Motion to CompelOAH ordered Alameda Unified to give Student's counsel the last known contact information for two former staff witnesses so Student could subpoena them, under a protective order limiting its use.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for the Rocklin superintendent's testimony and records because Student did not show they were relevant to the sole issue: whether Rocklin implemented Student's health plan.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Pleasanton's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed four Student subpoenas to Pleasanton because the declarations listed only conclusory grounds. It narrowed five others and refused to quash subpoenas to CCCOE and third parties, finding Pleasanton lacked standing.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed most of Rocklin's subpoenas for Student's medical and child-abuse-report records as overbroad and privacy-invasive, limiting them to records tied to the single December 2, 2021 seizure incident at issue.
- Order Denying Request for Record, Granting Request for Reconsideration, and Granting Request for ContinuanceOAH denied Student's request for a copy of a voicemail but granted reconsideration and a continuance because Student's attorney's illness, raised for the first time, supplied good cause.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to quash Monterey's subpoena of Student's education advocate, finding attorney-client privilege does not bar all of her testimony and no advance showing of materiality is required.
2021
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Further ResponseOAH denied Student's motion to compel Ventura to give a more detailed response to the complaint. No law lets a party challenge the sufficiency of a district's response, as opposed to a missing response.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH partly enforced Etiwanda's subpoena to the Parents' own in-home services agency. Records tied to Student's claims and reimbursement request must be produced, but privileged, broad medical, and insurance records were quashed or narrowed.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for Pleasanton's student records, emails, texts, chat logs, and SEIS audit trail because the supporting declaration only made a conclusory claim that the records were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoenas for all emails between seven District staff and Parent, finding no showing of reasonable necessity and an overbroad request with no time limit or link to Student.
- Order Requiring Parties to File a Copy of the Disputed Subpoena Duces Tecum With OAHOAH ordered both parties to file the disputed subpoena by December 10, 2021, before ruling on Pleasanton's motion to quash, because neither side had given OAH a copy.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoenas for documents from nine Tamalpais staff members and five school board trustees because they demanded production before hearing, and there is no right to prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Response as MootOAH denied Student's motion to compel Pleasanton to respond to her complaint as moot, because Pleasanton's November 16 filing appeared to respond to the second amended complaint.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Response to Second Amended Due Process ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel Pleasanton Unified's response to the second amended complaint as moot because the District filed its response after the motion was filed.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel ObservationOAH denied Student's motion to make Bellflower Unified allow a remote Zoom classroom observation by Student's expert, because the district offered an in-person observation and the continued hearing date left ample time.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel ResponseOAH ordered Pleasanton to give Parent a written response to Student's due process complaint, or proof of a prior response or prior written notice, by November 12, 2021, because the IDEA requires one.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Santa Ana's subpoena for Student's Cal State Long Beach records because the district showed no link between Student's current college records and the claimed high school FAPE denials.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for a principal's records because it demanded documents before the hearing and was not properly served on the district's attorney or filed with OAH.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Response to Due Process ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel Antioch to file a fuller response to the due process complaint because the IDEA has no procedure for challenging a response's sufficiency, but allowed Student to amend.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Response to Due Process ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel a further response to the complaint because the District had filed a response, and the IDEA has no procedure for challenging how sufficient a district's response is.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas and Modifying Date and Time for Witness' Appearance and TestimonyOAH denied Student's motion to quash Cupertino Union's subpoenas to Student's private assessors and therapists, finding the records relevant to the 2019 and 2020 assessments and services at issue.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel ObservationOAH ordered Irvine to let Student's independent assessor and expert observe the placements Irvine proposed for the 2018-2021 school years at issue, because Education Code section 56329(b) allows observation of any proposed placement.
- Order Denying Prehearing DiscoveryOAH denied Student's request for prehearing discovery of IEP meeting notes and a PowerPoint with metadata, because prehearing discovery is not available in special education due process proceedings.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH largely enforced Beverly Hills' subpoena for Student's private school records because they bear on Parents' reimbursement claim, but ordered attorney communications and therapy records held in camera by the judge.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to quash Arcadia's subpoena for records from San Marino Unified, finding them relevant because Parents' claims to go beyond the statute of limitations rely on those records.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Production of DocumentsOAH denied Student's motion to compel documents. It had no jurisdiction over the non-parties, and Student did not show Del Mar ignored a records request or limit the request to IDEA-related records.
- Order Overruling Prentice School's Objections to Newport-Mesa Unified School District's Subpoena to Produce RecordsOAH overruled Prentice School's objections to Newport-Mesa's records subpoena, finding it timely served 15 days before hearing and specific enough, and left relevance and privilege objections for hearing.
- Order Granting Motions to Reconsider, Order Unconsolidating Cases and Granting Motion to Continue in 2021050590OAH unconsolidated the cases and continued the District's case because Parent fired Student's attorney in that case. A Student cannot be both self-represented and represented by counsel in one consolidated action.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Definitive Response to Due Process ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to force Los Angeles County to file a more detailed response to the complaint, because the IDEA gives a filing party no way to challenge the sufficiency of a response.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Los Alamitos' email-served records subpoenas to three recipients who never consented to electronic service, and upheld the personally served Prentice School subpoena with its production date extended to June 28, 2021.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference and Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed Student's subpoenas for two California Department of Education officials who helped draft state mask guidance, finding Student showed no reasonable necessity for their testimony.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference and Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Tulare City's subpoena for private school records because Student sought tuition reimbursement for that school, making the records reasonably necessary and not overbroad.
- Order Directing Respondent to Produce Last Known Address of Ashley McCoyOAH ordered Rialto Unified to get a nonpublic school witness's last known contact information and give it to Student's attorney within 24 hours, finding good cause after oral argument.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum to Compton because it demanded records before the hearing, lacked a showing of reasonable necessity, and did not use OAH's required subpoena form and procedures.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena for San Benito's Superintendent to testify because Student did not show he knew anything about Student's FAPE issues, and general district policymaking was not before OAH.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Further Response to ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to force Ventura to answer a 206-paragraph complaint paragraph by paragraph, because neither the IDEA nor state law lets the filing party challenge the sufficiency of a district's response.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed six San Dieguito subpoenas duces tecum for Student's records because they demanded production four days before hearing, an impermissible form of prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying as Moot in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Compel Production of Education RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to compel assessment records. The fall 2020 protocols had already been produced, and no spring 2021 records were owed because Parents never requested them and no reports existed yet.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Production of Documents, Granting Second Motion for Reconsideration and Denying Motion to Compel ObservationOAH denied Student's motions to compel documents and an independent evaluator's observation because Student showed neither that unproduced records existed nor what Urban's currently offered placement was.
- Order Granting Request for Reconsideration and Denying Request for ObservationOAH reconsidered but again denied Student's request for an independent expert to observe Urban Discovery Academy classrooms, because Student did not identify the classes or purpose or show the June 2020 offer is still current.
- Order Granting Request for Reconsideration, Finding Good Cause for Student's Late Filing, and Granting in Part Motion to Compel ObservationOAH ordered Bellflower to let Student's expert virtually observe two full 70-minute classes, not just 20 minutes, because the District's own assessors were not shown to be so limited. In-person and off-site remote observation were denied.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel Production of Student RecordsOAH ordered West Contra Costa to diligently search for Student's education records and file a sworn declaration, because unsworn emails saying the records might be in a warehouse were not competent evidence.
- Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena, Modifying Production Date, and Continuing Due Process HearingOAH refused to quash Student's subpoena to Oak Hill School because Mount Diablo lacked standing. It narrowed Student's subpoena to the district, moved production to May 25, 2021, and continued the hearing.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum Without PrejudiceOAH denied San Jose's motion to quash Student's subpoenas duces tecum without prejudice because San Jose did not attach the subpoenas, so OAH could not judge service, scope, or necessity.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel ObservationOAH ordered Roseville to let Student's independent evaluator observe Student's placement because counsel's sworn declaration that an IEE was underway was enough to trigger Education Code section 56329.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel ObservationOAH denied without prejudice Student's motion to compel an independent evaluator's observation because Student did not identify what should be observed, his current placement, the assessor, or any denied observation request.
- Order Granting, in Part, Student's Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed Manhattan's records subpoenas to Student's psychiatrist and Paradigm for lack of reasonable necessity, but mostly enforced the subpoena to Student's private evaluator because Student put her evaluation at issue.
- Order of No ActionOAH took no action on Student's motion to quash Chaffey's records subpoenas because Student's amended complaint and the reset hearing timelines made the subpoenas, issued under the original complaint, moot.
- Order Granting and Denying, in Part, District's Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH partly quashed Student's subpoena to Corona-Norco, rejecting overbroad or irrelevant requests but ordering production of narrow, Student-specific records by March 30, 2021.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH narrowed San Marcos Unified's subpoenas to Student's independent evaluators, finding the requests for nearly every record 'regarding Student' overbroad and not shown to be reasonably necessary to the district's defense.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Granting Request for Consolidation and ContinuanceOAH denied Student's motion to compel without prejudice after the District said it had produced all records. It consolidated three cases, continued the hearing to May 2021, dismissed non-IDEA civil rights claims, and refused bifurcation.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH set four distance-learning FAPE issues for a March 23, 2021 videoconference hearing and ordered Corona-Norco to produce 19 disputed record items if Student's counsel verified they had been requested.
- Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint and Finding Motion to Quash MootOAH let Student amend the complaint without opposition and found Manhattan Beach's motion to quash moot, because subpoenas issued under the original complaint no longer require production.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motions to quash Anaheim Elementary's medical-records subpoenas without reaching the merits, because Parent again served the district's special education director instead of its attorney, violating prior service orders.
- Order Overruling Objection to Subpoena Duces Tecum as MootOAH overruled Student's objection to San Dieguito's records subpoena to Cherry Gulch as moot because the district effectively withdrew the subpoena and conceded it must issue a new one.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena to Camille Resendez because the hearing issues concern only the May 4, 2020 IEP meeting, which she did not attend, so Student showed no reasonable necessity for her testimony.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed Student's subpoenas for records to three Fremont staff as overbroad, unsupported, and seeking privileged communications, but kept a subpoena for a staff witness who knew about the IEP meeting.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied Parent's motion to quash Fremont's subpoena compelling Student to testify, finding good cause, and on its own motion dismissed Student's privacy claim under FERPA and Education Code section 49076.7 for lack of jurisdiction.
2020
- Order Granting and Denying in Parts Kern High School District's Motion to Quash Student's Document SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena to Kern about child welfare and foster youth records, and narrowed a second subpoena to education records only, because Student did not show reasonable necessity for broader requests.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum on Jan CasteelOAH ordered Student's designated expert to produce her correspondence with Student's counsel for the ALJ's private (in camera) review, because work product protection generally ends once an expert is designated to testify.
- Order Denying, in Part, and Granting, in Part, Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed most of Student's subpoenas to two Torrance expert witnesses because Student used an outdated form, gave too little notice, and showed no reasonable necessity, but ordered Torrance to produce one witness's resume.
- Order Granting, in Part, and Denying, in Part, Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH ordered Compton Unified to produce Student's education records within five days but quashed the rest of Student's subpoena, finding it sought prehearing production without a showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Issued to Custodian of Records for Kids Connections Developmental Therapy CenterOAH denied Student's motion to quash Chaffey's subpoena for a therapy clinic's records because Student's own witness testimony put the clinic's services and evaluation directly at issue.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum and Modifying the Return DateOAH quashed 12 of Student's subpoenas to San Dieguito staff as overbroad and unsupported by reasonable necessity, but refused to quash subpoenas to Student's advocate and a county employee because the District lacked standing.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Issued to Custodian of Records for the Launchpad Therapy for KidsOAH denied Student's motion to quash Chaffey's subpoena for an independent evaluator's clinic records, finding the records relevant and necessary because Student's own testimony from the evaluator put her assessment at issue.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Issued to Custodian of Records for Dr. Robin MorrisOAH denied Student's motion to quash Chaffey's subpoena for the records of independent evaluator Dr. Robin Morris, finding the records reasonably necessary after Student's own questioning of Dr. Morris put her evaluation at issue.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to quash Capistrano's subpoenas for records from Futures Academy and the IEE evaluator, finding the records relevant to Student's reimbursement and placement claims.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumsOAH denied Student's motion to quash Long Beach's subpoenas for Student's experts' records, finding them narrowly tailored, timed for the first hearing day, and not seeking privileged attorney work product.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Issued to Custodian of Records for SKY Pediatric TherapyOAH denied Student's motion to quash Chaffey's subpoena for SKY Pediatric Therapy records because Student's own occupational therapy claim put those clinical therapy records directly at issue.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Los Angeles to Make Non-Employee Witnesses Available at Hearing or to Accept Service on Their BehalfOAH denied Student's motion to make Los Angeles produce nonpublic school staff as witnesses or accept subpoenas for them, because Student offered no evidence the district controls those non-employees.
- Order Denying Motions to Quash Subpoenas Issued to Abby Rozenberg and Susan HollarOAH denied Student's motions to quash Chaffey's subpoenas to two speech evaluators because Student's own hearing issue put their 2017 and 2019 evaluation reports directly at issue.
- Order Directing Compliance With Subpoenas Pending Ruling on Motions to QuashOAH took Student's motions to quash six Chaffey subpoenas to independent evaluators under submission and ordered Student to have the evaluators send their records to OAH, because the records may be relevant depending on Student's testimony.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference and Granting Motion to Compel Educational RecordsOAH ordered Norris to produce all of Student's educational records by June 22, 2020. California's COVID-19 timeline waiver did not suspend federal IDEA records-access rights.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed all 18 of Student's subpoenas for documents because they gave too little time to comply, lacked a specific showing of reasonable necessity, and were not limited to the school years at issue.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference for Hearing by VideoconferenceOAH ordered Redondo Beach Unified, which did not object, to give Student the names and titles of everyone at the October 12, 2018 IEP meeting, and set nine issues for a May 2020 video hearing.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Served on Sara Rice Schiff, Ph.D.OAH quashed Antioch's subpoena for a private psychologist's records on Student because the supporting declaration was conclusory, the requests were overbroad with no time limit, and Student's medical privacy outweighed it.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoenas duces tecum to four Los Altos administrators and staff because Student's supporting declaration only listed the documents and did not show reasonable necessity or relevance.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to quash the District's records subpoenas as moot because the hearing date the subpoenas targeted was vacated when the case was consolidated and reset.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH refused to quash Student's subpoenas for teacher and psychologist records. Because they were returnable on the first hearing day, they were not improper discovery, but OAH narrowed them to issues in the expedited hearing.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel ObservationOAH ordered Paso Robles to let Student's expert observe its adult transition program, because California law gives students the right to have their expert observe a district's proposed placement before testifying.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Without PrejudiceOAH quashed Bakersfield City's subpoena for Student's psychologist records without prejudice because the district did not serve the Notice to Consumer on Student before serving the provider.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied a non-attorney advocate's motion to quash Alta Loma's subpoena for an assessor's records. He could not assert Student's privilege, and the records were reasonably necessary and not overbroad.
- Order Finding Motion to Quash Subpoena MootOAH found Poway Unified's motion to quash Student's subpoena for browser history moot. The hearing had been continued, and Student had already served a new, similar subpoena for the same records.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena in Part, and Modifying Date of Production of Subpoenaed DocumentsOAH partly granted Student's motion to quash Upland's subpoena to a private school. Because there is no prehearing discovery, it moved production to the first hearing day but otherwise upheld the subpoena.
2019
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to quash Upland's subpoena duces tecum without prejudice because neither side provided a copy of the actual subpoena for the judge to review.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena to Turlock's special education director as duplicative and narrowed the records-custodian subpoena to 2017-2018 onward, excluding texts and phone messages and requiring redaction of other students' information.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Modesto's Motion to Squash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena to a Modesto assistant superintendent and narrowed the records subpoena to the 2014-2017 school years at issue, excluding text and phone messages as overbroad discovery.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's entire subpoena for district emails and text messages because Student did not show the records were material and relevant, and the subpoena improperly sought production before hearing.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference and Granting Motion to Compel an ObservationOAH granted Yucaipa-Calimesa's unopposed motion to observe Student at his private religious school, because Student seeks reimbursement and prospective funding and confirmed he did not oppose the observation.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena and Granting in Part and Modifying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Pleasanton's records subpoena to a non-party for insufficient time. It moved Parent's production date from the day before hearing to the first hearing day because the district has no right to prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena and Modifying Production DateOAH denied Student's motion to quash Garden Grove's subpoenas for two doctors' records because the requests were limited to issues tied to Student's claims and needed for cross-examination; production moved to January 14, 2020.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Granting Motion to Amend Complaint; Denying Motions to Order Release of Witness Names and Re: Conflict; and Ruling Motion to Continue MootOAH denied Student's motion to make Poway Unified release the names of non-teacher classroom staff, because the reset hearing dates give Student time to get the names informally.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Yucaipa-Calimesa's subpoena for Parent's private school records because its ambiguous early-production instruction could be read as prehearing discovery, which IDEA and California law do not allow.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference, Granting Motion to Amend, Denying Request for Pupil Records, and Denying Request to Remove Harbottle Law Group as CounselOAH denied self-represented Parents' request to compel Los Alamitos to produce pupil records because it rested only on unsworn statements, and refused to remove the district's law firm for an alleged conflict.
- Order Denying Motion to Subpoena DocumentsOAH denied Student's motion to subpoena IEP team meeting emails because Student did not follow the regulatory subpoena procedure and did not show a records request had been made to Newport-Mesa.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Proof of Residency or Alternatively to DismissOAH denied Montebello Unified's motion to compel proof of Student's residency or dismiss the complaint because it targeted the original complaint, which became moot once Student's amended complaint was allowed.
- Order Denying Motion for DiscoveryOAH denied Student's motion to compel Poway to produce records before the prehearing conference because there is no right to prehearing discovery in special education due process cases.
- Amended Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Administrative RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to quash a subpoena for Parent's Department of Social Services hearing records, finding them reasonably necessary to the districts' defense that the residential placement was not educational.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Custodian of Records for Adventist Health SonoraOAH quashed the districts' subpoena for Student's hospital psychiatric records because the districts did not give Student timely consumer notice and directed the records to a non-party district.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Administrative RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to quash a subpoena for records from Parent's Social Services funding hearing, because both cases turn on Student's need for residential placement; confidential juvenile court records are excluded.
- Order Denying Newport-Mesa Unified School District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Newport-Mesa's motion to quash Student's records subpoena as moot because the hearing was continued and the subpoena was not extended to the new hearing date.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied Student's motion to compel prehearing production of records because special education due process has no general right to prehearing discovery and the district swore all education records were already produced.
- Order Denying Request to Compel Answer as MootOAH denied Student's motion to compel Redondo Beach to respond to the second amended complaint as moot, because the District filed its response two days after the motion.
- Order Requiring Filing of Additional Documents in Support of Motion to QuashOAH put off ruling on Student's motion to quash Cajon Valley's records subpoenas because neither side filed copies of the subpoenas, and ordered both parties to file them.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel San Bruno to Provide a Sufficient Response to ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel San Bruno to file a sufficient response to the complaint because the motion was untimely without good cause and San Bruno could rely on its earlier prior written notice.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum to Inglewood Unified because it demanded document production months before hearing, and special education law does not authorize prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Response to Complaint as MootOAH denied Student's motion to compel Inspire Charter School to respond to the due process complaint as moot, because Inspire had already filed its response.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Kern's subpoena for county mental health records because Student put those findings at issue. The records will be held in camera and released only for rebuttal.
- Order Partially Granting Student's Motion to Compel a ResponseOAH ordered Chime Institute's Schwarzenegger Community School to respond to Student's due process complaint by August 9, 2019. It denied the motion as moot for Los Angeles Unified, which had already responded.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Vista's subpoena for his expert's records, finding the subpoena properly served and the records, including the expert's correspondence, relevant and reasonably necessary.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Answer to Request for Due Process as MootOAH denied Student's motion to compel Pleasanton to answer the amended due process complaint as moot because Pleasanton showed it had sent a response the same day the motion was filed.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel School and Staff Access for Student's Expert's Functional Behavior AssessmentOAH ordered Long Beach to give Student's expert at least eight hours to observe Student and reasonable access to staff for a functional behavior assessment, because Education Code section 56329 guarantees equivalent observation access.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Granting Student's Motion for Consolidation; Denying District's Request for Continuance; and Denying District's Request for a Signed ReleaseOAH refused to make Parent sign a FERPA release before Cypress could serve filings on Student's attorney, ordered Cypress to serve all filings, and consolidated the cases with Student's case as primary.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash San Marcos' subpoenas for Parents' emails with Student's private school and independent expert, finding the emails relevant and reasonably necessary to the reimbursement claims.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for all Vista communications about Student and Parents because it demanded prehearing production, was overbroad, and lacked a showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Quashing Subpoenas for Medical RecordsOAH quashed Anaheim's subpoenas for Student's medical records. Special education cases allow no pre-hearing discovery, the requests were overbroad and lacked good cause, and they invaded Student's privacy.
- Order to Verify Complete Production of Educational Records and/or Produce Educational RecordsOAH ordered Long Beach to swear under penalty of perjury by April 12, 2019 that it produced all of Student's education records, or to produce the rest, after Student said discipline records were missing.
- Order Denying Request That OAH Subpoena Body Camera Footage; Denying Motion to Cease and Desist Retaliatory Conduct; and Denying Request to Designate a Single Point of ContactOAH denied Student's requests for a subpoena of police body camera footage, a cease-and-desist order against alleged ADA retaliation, and a single district point of contact, because these remedies fall outside OAH's jurisdiction.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH largely denied Student's motion to quash Citrus Springs' subpoenas to Student's optometrist, audiologist, and behavior analyst, finding the records reasonably necessary, but limited communications requests to those about Student's treatment or testimony.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Los Angeles Unified School DistrictOAH quashed a charter school's subpoena for Student's records from Los Angeles Unified because special education law allows no prehearing discovery and the charter showed no good cause for the records.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumsOAH denied Student's motion to quash Irvine's records subpoenas to Student's experts and therapy provider because it was untimely, Student lacked standing, and the records were relevant to experts and reimbursement claims.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena to a Rocklin Unified witness because the hearing had moved to March 19, so the subpoena now required records to be produced before the hearing.
- Order Denying San Marcos' Motion to Quash Subpoenas and Subpoenas Duces Tecum; and Denying Student's Motion to Strike the Declaration of Dawn DullyOAH denied San Marcos' motion to quash Student's subpoenas for 12 district employees and their emails about Student, finding the records reasonably necessary, narrowly drawn, and not burdensome to gather.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Michael ForsbergOAH required Student's behavior expert to produce his source records and his communications with Parent at hearing, but quashed Irvine's request for the expert's communications with Student's counsel as protected work product.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for two years of district emails because it was served after hours one business day before hearing, and Student did not show the emails were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting Without Prejudice Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Antioch's subpoena for Student's records from a private school because it named no specific witness, was overbroad, showed no reasonable necessity, and amounted to prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Saddleback Valley's subpoenas for records from Student's designated experts and private providers. The records were reasonably necessary to test the experts' opinions and Student's reimbursement claims.
2018
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Panama's subpoena to Kern Regional Center because special education law allows no prehearing discovery from third parties, and the subpoena was overbroad and lacked a showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Denying Student's Motions to Compel Production of Pupil Records, and to Continue HearingOAH denied Student's motions to compel pupil records and continue the hearing because they lacked sworn declarations, proposed no new dates, and were not served on Anaheim's attorneys.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash a Subpoena Duces Tecum for Records From Santa Maria Joint Union High School DistrictOAH denied Santa Maria Joint Union High School District's motion to quash Student's records subpoena, finding it was limited to the issues and time period in dispute and excluded privileged communications.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash a Subpoena Duces Tecum for Records From Santa Maria Bonita School DistrictOAH denied Santa Maria Bonita's motion to quash Student's subpoena for staff communications because the request was limited by date and topic and excluded privileged attorney communications.
- Order Granting Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoenas for district staff emails, Parent emails, and school bus videos, and limited sign-in logs to redacted copies, finding no reasonable necessity and protecting other students' privacy.
- Order Granting, in Part, Student's Motion to QuashOAH quashed Rocklin's subpoenas for Student's records from three medical providers because Rocklin showed no reasonable necessity, and deferred ruling on two hospital subpoenas to the first hearing day.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum and Subpoenas for Testimony Issued to Kellie Walders, Michael David Ramos, the Person Most Knowledgeable at Wayfinder Family Service, and the Person Most Knowledgeable at the California Department of EducationOAH largely upheld Saddleback Valley's subpoenas for Wayfinder records because Student asked to stay at Wayfinder, but it narrowed credential requests and quashed subpoenas requiring testimony on the first hearing day.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum Issued to Dr. Caroline Bailey and Jane VogelOAH denied Student's motion to quash the District's subpoenas for his two expert witnesses' records. Once Student designated them as experts, attorney work product protection no longer covered their materials.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum Issued to Nancy Berger and Lois BoothOAH mostly upheld Saddleback Valley's subpoenas to Wayfinder administrators because Student sought continued Wayfinder placement, but quashed requests for 2016-2017 credentials and moved production to the first hearing day.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Subpoena Duces Tecum for Records From Stacey HillOAH quashed the part of Pleasanton's subpoena requiring Student's therapist to produce records before hearing, because there is no prehearing discovery. It otherwise enforced the subpoena, with records delivered sealed for possible in camera review.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Records From Kathy FuttermanOAH quashed Pleasanton's subpoena for a former educational therapist's records because she had not worked with Student since 2017, was not a Barton tutor, and pre-hearing document production is not allowed.
- Order Denying in Part, and Granting in Part Student's Motion to Quash a Subpoena Duces Tecum for Records From Fusion AcademyOAH quashed the part of Pleasanton's subpoena demanding Fusion Academy records before hearing, since special education hearings have no prehearing discovery, but required Fusion to produce the records at hearing.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Records From Cynthia PetersonOAH denied Student's motion to quash Pleasanton's subpoena for a psychologist's records as moot, because Pleasanton withdrew the subpoena after sending it to the wrong address and issued a new one.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Second Classroom Observation by Student's ExpertOAH denied Student's motion for a second expert observation of the district's proposed placement, holding that districts need not let a parent's expert question staff because there is no prehearing discovery in California.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel Classroom ObservationOAH ordered Goleta to let Student's behavior expert observe Student for up to seven hours, in blocks of up to 3.25 hours, matching the observation time Goleta's own assessor received.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for school incident reports because special education hearings allow no prehearing discovery and Student never showed the documents were reasonably necessary.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum for Dr. MocegaOAH denied Parent's motion to quash Anaheim's subpoena for a treating doctor's records, finding HIPAA notice was satisfied, service was proper, and the request was not overly broad.
- Order Denying Student's Opposition to Subpoena to Compel Medical ReleasesOAH denied Student's opposition to subpoenas for medical records without prejudice because it did not say which motion, subpoena, or records it challenged.
- Order Denying Request for Telephonic Testimony and Requiring Personal Appearance of WitnessOAH denied Student's last-minute request for a subpoenaed doctor to testify by phone, finding no good cause, and ordered him to appear in person or explain why he cannot.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel DiscoveryOAH denied Student's motion to compel discovery because special education due process has no formal prehearing discovery and Anaheim showed it repeatedly offered Parent access to and copies of Student's records.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Seeking Records From Dr. StepanoffOAH denied Parent's motion to quash Anaheim's subpoena for a psychologist's records because the district followed HIPAA and consumer-notice rules and showed the records were reasonably necessary to its defense.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum to Orinda because it sought records before the hearing, which is improper pre-hearing discovery not allowed in special education due process cases.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Summit-Denali's subpoenas for Student's private school and therapist records because, under the snapshot rule, records the IEP team never saw are irrelevant to judging the IEP offer.
- Order Granting Fruitvale School District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum for district contracts with evaluators because it required production 20 days before hearing, and IDEA due process gives no right to prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel ResponseOAH ordered San Bruno to serve and file a response to Student's amended due process complaint by July 17, 2018, because districts must respond to a complaint within 10 days.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part, Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed two of 19 categories in Parent's subpoena duces tecum as overbroad or unnecessary, but ordered District to bring documents in the other 17 categories to the first hearing day.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed all three of Student's subpoenas duces tecum because they were unsigned and undated, sought prehearing discovery, were improperly served, and asked for documents not reasonably necessary to Student's residential placement claims.
- Order Following June 18, 2018 Prehearing Conference on Expedited IssuesOAH ordered District to produce Student's educational records, provisionally barred District from calling Student as a witness, and dismissed four expulsion-related issues as outside OAH's special education jurisdiction.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH quashed District's subpoenas for Student's private school and provider records because they required production on June 26, 2018, which was no longer the hearing date, making them improper pre-hearing discovery.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference of June 8, 2018; Order Granting Request for Mediation and to Continue Prehearing Conference and Due Process HearingOAH denied as moot Student's motion to let his expert observe District's offered placement because the observation had already happened, and granted the parties' joint request for mediation and a continuance.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel ResponseOAH ordered Oakland Unified to answer Student's due process complaint by May 31, 2018, because districts must respond within 10 days, but denied Student's request for a hearing on the response as premature.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel Classroom ObservationOAH ordered District to let Student's independent evaluator observe Student for 90 continuous minutes, because District had put no time limit on its own psychologist's observations.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH quashed Student's subpoena to District's Executive Director for Special Education because it demanded documents before hearing at counsel's office, and IDEA hearings allow no pre-hearing discovery by subpoena.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Dr. Rosa PattersonOAH denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for her expert's records, finding the records reasonably necessary and that calling the expert waived privilege over her communications with Parents.
- Order Denying Student's Motion for Production of Educational RecordsOAH denied Student's mid-hearing motion to compel District to produce "behavior binders," because Student never showed they were educational records, offered nothing new to justify reconsideration, and had served no subpoena.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Child Development SchoolOAH denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for private school records because Student put her progress there at issue by seeking reimbursement and a similar prospective placement.
- Order Granting Without Prejudice Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed San Marcos' subpoena for Student's private school records because the District sought them only to rebut a placement claim that was not an issue in its own due process case.
- Order Denying Student's Motion for Observation of the Autism Spectrum Disorder ClassOAH denied Student's request for an independent evaluator to observe an autism class because District never proposed or offered that class, so Education Code section 56329 did not require access.
- Order Granting Without Prejudice Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed District's subpoena for Parents' correspondence with Student's expert because it sought records before hearing at counsel's office and showed no reasonable necessity for the records.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Granting Request for Continuance; Setting Prehearing Conference and Hearing Dates; Granting Change in Venue; and Denying Motion to Quash as MootOAH denied Student's motion to quash Palo Alto's records subpoenas as moot, because the hearing was continued and moved, so new subpoenas would be needed. OAH also granted Palo Alto's contested continuance.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Charter's subpoenas duces tecum because it was filed after the motion deadline without good cause, and the wrong case number and return date did not invalidate the subpoenas.
- Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Motion to Quash Second Subpoena Duces Tecum Served on Child Development CenterOAH mostly denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for private placement records because Student put that program at issue by seeking reimbursement, quashing only videos showing other children.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum; Modifying Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed most of Student's subpoena duces tecum as overbroad, duplicative, or unsupported, but ordered District to produce narrowed categories of bus and program communications, incident reports, observation notes, and record-access logs.
- Order Granting Without Prejudice Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed District's subpoena for Student's private-placement records because of facial defects, but allowed District to reissue a corrected subpoena and said the records themselves are relevant.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Obtain Signatures on Juvenile Court's Protective OrderOAH denied Student's request that the ALJ and District's counsel sign a juvenile court protective order, finding no authority for it and noting Student can already see his own juvenile records.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motions to QuashOAH quashed most of Student's prehearing subpoena because there is no prehearing discovery, but ordered District to produce Student's IEPs, test protocols, and service logs within five business days as education records.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena for Testimony of Michele CainOAH denied District's motion to quash Student's subpoena recalling a former assistant principal in an expedited discipline hearing, because her further testimony is potentially relevant to whether District knew Student had a disability.
- Order Granting Without Prejudice Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena without prejudice because it went to District's lawyers, was returnable at a nonexistent hearing, and sought confidential counseling notes without Student's consent. Pre-incident records were found relevant.
- Order Denying District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Hermosa Beach City School District's motion to quash Student's subpoenas duces tecum to two District staff, finding the records relevant, adequately described, and properly served on District's counsel.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH let Student's subpoena for ACES behavior records stand but limited it to records through November 17, 2016, and moved production to the first hearing day, because IDEA hearings allow no prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for school surveillance video of the incident behind his expulsion referral because it sought prehearing discovery, was irrelevant to the expedited basis-of-knowledge issues, and was procedurally defective.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Granting Request for Continuance; Setting Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing; Granting Request to Compel Production of Educational RecordsOAH ordered District to produce Student's complete educational records by January 10, 2018, and continued the hearing, because District admitted delays in providing the voluminous file over winter break.
- Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint, Denying Motion to Dismiss and Denying Motion Compelling ResponseOAH granted Student's unopposed motion to amend her complaint. It denied both Pleasanton's statute-of-limitations motion to dismiss and Student's motion to compel a response as moot, because both targeted the superseded original complaint.
2017
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum for records, emails, IEP recordings, and surveillance materials because Student made no factual showing of their relevance to the bifurcated statute of limitations issue.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum; Modifying Subpoena Duces TecumOAH refused to quash Student's subpoena for District records, including emails and bus behavior documents, because they relate to the placement claims, but moved production to the first hearing day because prehearing discovery isn't allowed.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part District's Motion to Quash SubpoenasOAH partly quashed Student's subpoenas, blocking requests for other students' records, medical records, and records back to 2013, but ordered District to produce Pioneer and sixth-grade records and the IEP-team teacher.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Response to Due Process ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel a fuller District response to the due process complaint because no law lets a party challenge the sufficiency of a district's response before hearing.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH struck the early-delivery option from District's subpoena to Student's private school as improper prehearing discovery, but required the school to produce all requested records on the first hearing day.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part District's Motion for ObservationOAH let District observe Student for two hours at her private school but refused to order access to private school staff, because Education Code section 56329(d) authorizes only observation.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum as MootOAH denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for private school records as moot because the subpoena was returnable on a hearing date that had since been continued.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash SDT to Jill Weckerly, Ph.D.OAH denied without prejudice Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for Dr. Jill Weckerly's records because the subpoena itself was never filed with OAH.
- Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint and Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH granted Student's unopposed motion to amend and denied Student's motion to quash Antioch's subpoena as moot, because the amended complaint made the subpoena no longer valid.
- Order Quashing Subpoenas to TestifyOAH quashed subpoenas for two California Department of Education employees because no witness fees were paid and the testimony sought was improper expert opinion on the law of graduation-requirement waivers.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Denying Student's Motion to Compel; Granting Alameda's Motion to Consolidate; Granting Motion to Bifurcate Issue of Student's Residency; and Denying Motion to ContinueOAH denied Student's motion to compel as moot because Alameda filed its response. Over Student's objection, it consolidated Alameda's residency case with Student's case and bifurcated residency to avoid inconsistent rulings.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to New Vista SchoolOAH denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for Student's New Vista School education records, finding them reasonably necessary for District to cross-examine New Vista witnesses and contest placement.
- Order Denying in Part and Granting in Part Motion to Quash Amended Subpoena Duces TecumOAH required Parents to testify at hearing but quashed District's demand that they produce documents, finding District must keep Student's records itself and the communications request was overbroad.
- Order Dismissing District's Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Produce Documents for Due Process HearingOAH quashed District's five subpoenas duces tecum without prejudice. After the hearing was continued, the subpoenas demanded records before the hearing, and there is no prehearing discovery in special education cases.
- Order Granting in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH partly quashed District's subpoena for Student's independent evaluator's records, requiring production of materials behind her opinions but excusing District-generated records and family-focused documents, with confidential items reviewed in camera.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Compel Observation of Student's Private PlacementOAH allowed District's contracted consultant, not just its own staff, to observe Student at his parentally placed residential treatment center, because Education Code section 56329(d) does not limit who may observe.
- Order Granting Motion to CompelOAH ordered Los Angeles Unified to file a real written response to Student's complaint, finding its letter, which only restated the issues and one sentence about a 2009 IEP meeting, legally insufficient.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Response to Request for Due Process HearingOAH denied Student's motion to compel a better response from District, finding District's amended response gave adequate notice of its position, addressed the material allegations, and stated its proposed remedy.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena re Eric WilliamsOAH denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for Eric Williams' hearing testimony because Student's residency in the District is material to the case, making his testimony reasonably necessary.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash District's Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied without prejudice Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for San Leandro Juvenile Justice Center records because the subpoena itself was never filed with OAH.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum Served September 13, 2017 and Denying Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum Served September 14, 2017OAH quashed Student's emailed subpoenas because the District never agreed to email service, but upheld the personally served subpoenas for the assessor's contract, invoices, and communications, rejecting timeliness, relevance, and privilege objections.
- Order Granting Motion to QuashOAH quashed Student's subpoena for 30-day access to District's former SchoolLoop parent-teacher messages because there is no prehearing discovery and Student did not show the messages were education records.
- Order for Supplemental Briefing on Student's Motion to Compel Response and Shift CostsOAH held off ruling on Student's motion to compel District to respond to the complaint and shift costs, and ordered more briefing after District raised new arguments at the prehearing conference.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum on Prentice School, the Anxiety and Depression Center, and U.C. Irvine Medical Center Without PrejudiceOAH quashed District's three subpoenas for Student's private school, mental health, and medical records because the 'any and all' requests were overbroad, lacked reasonable necessity, and amounted to prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Respondents' Motion to Quash Subpoenas and Subpoenas Duces Tecum, Limiting Student's Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena request for records on developing the speech-language IEE provider list but kept a narrowed request for records on IEE cost criteria from January 1, 2016 forward.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum, Limiting Respondents' Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed most of the districts' subpoena for records from Student's speech expert witness as overly broad prehearing discovery, allowing only her rate-related correspondence since January 2016.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH granted Mother's request that District produce Student's previously requested but unproduced educational records, set a June 2017 hearing on dyslexia and nonpublic school claims, and granted Mother's hearing accommodation.
- Order Denying Motion to Dismiss; Granting Motion to Compel Production of Student Records; and Denying Motion to Continue Without PrejudiceOAH ordered Oakland to produce IEP meeting audio recordings, test protocols, rating scales, behavior data, service logs, attendance and grades, rejecting Oakland's claim that only records kept in a central file are education records.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Denying Student's Motion to Consolidate; Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Directed to the Prentice School; Granting Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Directed to Dr. Mitchel PerlmanOAH quashed District's records subpoena to Dr. Mitchel Perlman because it sought communications with Student's attorneys and had no time limits, but upheld the subpoena to The Prentice School and denied consolidation.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Lafayette's subpoena for Student's private school records because subpoenas cannot be used for prehearing discovery and Lafayette did not show reasonable necessity.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Order Granting Motion to Continue; Order Granting Motion to Change Venue; Order Granting Motion to Compel Observation Without Video RecordingOAH let District observe Student in his parent-arranged private placement to prepare for hearing, and barred Parents from video recording the observation because District's observers objected and Student cited no legal right to record.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed District's subpoena for Student's private school records because it sought improper prehearing discovery and District, which did not oppose, never showed the records were reasonably necessary.
- Order Granting District's and Charter School's Motion to QuashOAH quashed Student's civil-court notices to appear served on district witnesses, because special education hearings require subpoenas or subpoenas duces tecum issued on a showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH quashed Father's subpoena to Fremont's attorney as impermissible prehearing discovery and denied Student's motion to dismiss Fremont's assessment case, noting special education law has no summary adjudication process.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied Student's motions to compel District's educational records and a procedurally adequate response, and set an expedited hearing on whether District's March 15, 2017 manifestation determination was invalid.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Ordering District to Provide Student Education Records; Granting Request for Continuance; and Setting Hearing DatesOAH ordered Tracy to give Student all requested education records, including test protocols, by April 7, 2017. Tracy had delayed producing protocols for over two months, so OAH also granted Student a short continuance.
- Order Following Expedited Prehearing Conference; Granting Motion to Consolidate; Designating Student's Case as Lead; and Granting Motion to QuashOAH quashed Student's subpoenas duces tecum to two Guiding Hands School staff because an attorney who was not counsel of record issued them, and he did not sign them or the supporting declarations.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel Classroom ObservationOAH ordered District to let Student's expert observe three classes and lunch for three hours, because Education Code section 56329 gives Student's expert the right to observe the placement before hearing.
- Order Quashing Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum on its own motion because it demanded District records before hearing, which amounts to prohibited prehearing discovery in special education cases.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Response to ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to compel District and SLCOE to respond to the amended complaint as moot, because both agencies served their responses after the motion was filed.
- Order Granting Clovis Unified School District's Motion to StrikeOAH struck two Clovis internal emails, and Student's references to them, from Student's stay put motion and amended complaint because they were privileged attorney-client communications and work product that Clovis disclosed by accident.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part District's Motion in Limine and Motion to QuashOAH barred Student from relitigating in Phase Two matters already decided in the statute-of-limitations phase, quashed one teacher's subpoena, and kept the aide's subpoena and the records subpoenas.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoena for Student's educational records at The Prentice School, finding the records reasonably necessary because Student seeks prospective placement there.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel ObservationOAH ordered Parents to allow Irvine's behavior specialist to observe Student for up to two hours at his private school because Student seeks public funding of that unilateral placement.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH granted a joint motion for the ALJ to privately review Student's residential treatment center records, allowed four Student witnesses to testify by phone, and set the consolidated case for a February 2017 hearing.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference of January 18, 2017OAH granted District's request for its expert to observe Student at her private school but noted it cannot force the nonparty school to allow it. OAH also struck District's two unnamed witnesses and denied bifurcation.
2016
- Order Granting District's Motion to Observe StudentOAH ordered that three District education specialists may each observe Student for one hour at his nonpublic school, because Parent sought public funding for the placement and had restricted and canceled District's observations.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Vacaville's subpoena for Student's juvenile court placement orders because those records are confidential juvenile case files that Vacaville can obtain only through a juvenile court order.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Vacaville's subpoena duces tecum without prejudice because Student never filed the referenced exhibits, including the subpoena itself, so OAH could not review it.
- Order Granting Motion to Allow Expert's ObservationOAH granted Student's motion and ordered that Student's behavioral expert may observe Student for a full school day, including unstructured time, because District no longer disputed the full-day observation.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH partly denied District's motions to quash Student's subpoenas, ordering District and Gallagher Pediatric Therapy to produce emails and service records on Student's therapy goals, but excluded District's non-public agency contracts and policies as irrelevant.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel ProductionOAH denied Student's motion to compel BASC and Conners 3 rating scales and protocols because District showed through sworn declarations that it had produced everything it had and the remaining protocols were apparently lost.
- Order for Further InformationOAH required Districts to file a declaration showing how and when an independent assessor was served before it would consider certifying his failure to obey a subpoena for contempt.
- Order Compelling Expert Observation of Proposed PlacementOAH ordered District to let Student's expert observe the proposed general education placement at Woodland Hills Academy before hearing, citing parents' right to an independent observation under Education Code 56329 and Benjamin G.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH ordered District to produce internal emails about Student's transportation, disability, and IEP meeting scheduling because they are reasonably necessary to the issues, but quashed Student's request for District policies as irrelevant.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Teacher Interviews and Request for Expedited RulingOAH denied Student's motion to make San Luis Coastal teachers sit for interviews and fill out rating scales for Student's independent evaluator. Education Code section 56329 guarantees only an equivalent opportunity to observe.
- Order Granting, in Part, and Denying, in Part, Student's Motion to Quash District's Subpoena Duces TecumOAH let District subpoena Student's private school records because Student sought tuition reimbursement, but quashed the request for notes and correspondence not kept in Student's permanent file as overbroad.
- Order Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied District's motion to compel the names of private aides serving Student, because prehearing discovery is not authorized in special education hearings and District showed no sufficient cause.
- Order Granting, in Part, District's Motion to Quash Student's Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed most of Student's subpoenas for District emails and Woodcock-Johnson materials as not reasonably necessary, but left the auditory processing test materials for the ALJ to rule on at hearing.
- Order Granting District's Motion to QuashOAH quashed Student's subpoena for 53 categories of District documents because it named no production date and Parent's declaration did not show the records were reasonably necessary for hearing.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Student's Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for years of District bus routes and out-of-district transportation records because a one-sentence declaration did not show reasonable necessity, and the requests were overbroad.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Observation of Student at Private SchoolOAH denied District's request to compel Parents to allow a second observation of Student at his private school because Student sought a public general education placement, not a publicly funded private school placement.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed District's subpoena for Student's private school records because Student must produce placement evidence anyway, so District could not show reasonable necessity unless Student fails to disclose it.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference and Granting Motion in Limine Regarding Settlement Agreement and Denying Motion Regarding Observation at Nonpublic School and Denying Motion Regarding an Additional Hearing DateOAH denied District's request for more observations of Student at his nonpublic school because District had already observed him there, and ruled that a prior settlement barred challenges to District's 2014 assessment.
2015
- Order Granting District's Motion to QuashOAH quashed Student's subpoena for District's internal emails and correspondence because Student did not show the documents were reasonably necessary to prove a denial of FAPE.
- Order Denying Student's Request for Order Compelling District to Permit Classroom Observation by an ExpertOAH denied Student's request to have his expert observe two classrooms at Dieguito Middle School because the observation right covers only placements the district has proposed, and San Dieguito had not proposed these.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied Student's renewed request to compel production of all educational records because the districts had already declared they produced everything, and dismissed Student's Section 504/ADA claim as outside OAH's jurisdiction.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH partly quashed Twin Rivers' subpoenas to Student's independent assessors, allowing assessment records and protocols but blocking requests for records the District already had and overbroad correspondence and emails.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel ProductionOAH denied Student's motion to compel District to produce emails, phone logs, and other communications about stay-put transportation and placement because the request was not limited to education records and was overbroad.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part District's Motion to Quash Student's Subpoena Duces Tecum for Production of Documents at HearingOAH partly quashed Student's attorney-issued subpoena for District records. It narrowed the IEE-related email requests to non-privileged materials and quashed two requests the supporting affidavit never justified.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference of October 2, 2015, and Granting Bifurcation and Continuing CaseOAH partly quashed District's records subpoenas to Student's former schools and placement as overly broad and vague, limiting production to assessments, test protocols, progress reports, and settlement agreements, and bifurcated residency for hearing first.
- Order Granting, in Part, and Denying, in Part, Student's Motion to Quash District's Subpoena Duces TecumOAH struck the request for communications from District's subpoena to Student's private school but required the school to produce Student's other records, finding them reasonably necessary to address Student's remedy requests.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference and Order Granting Motion to Continue Third Day of Hearing and Denying Motion to CompelOAH denied Student's motion to compel prehearing production of the District's private investigator residency report, finding it was not an education record and Student did not show reasonable necessity.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH ordered Charter Schools to produce Student's educational records within the five-business-day deadline under Education Code section 56504 and set child find and assessment issues for a September 2015 hearing.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Partially Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to Central Valley Autism Project and Megan WolfeOAH denied Student's motion to partially quash District's subpoenas for behavior-provider records because they were narrowly limited in time and setting and necessary for District to contest Student's requested remedy.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Respondents to Produce Educational RecordsOAH denied Student's motion to compel production of educational records because the respondent agencies declared under penalty of perjury that they had already produced all records in their possession.
- Order Granting Motion to QuashOAH quashed Redwood City's subpoena to Charles Armstrong School for Student's records because special education law does not allow prehearing discovery, including subpoenas for early document production.
- Order Granting District's Request for Reconsideration and Granting Student's Motion to QuashOAH reconsidered its earlier ruling to weigh Redwood City's late-received opposition, but again quashed both district subpoenas to a private school because special education law allows no prehearing discovery.
- Order Granting Motion to QuashOAH quashed Redwood City's subpoena for Student's records from a private Montessori school because special education law does not allow parties to use subpoenas for prehearing discovery.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH quashed Student's subpoena requiring same-day document production, denied without prejudice Student's request for telephonic expert testimony, and set consolidated IEE and FAPE issues for hearing starting July 30, 2015.
- Order Granting Motion to QuashOAH quashed Lamont's subpoena seeking Student's records from Kern before hearing because special education law allows no prehearing discovery, and Lamont failed to show reasonable necessity.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied without prejudice Student's oral request for school staff attendance records, Student's request to audio record the hearing, and District's motion to exclude evidence created after the complaint, and set the consolidated hearing.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied Student's motion to compel February 2015 progress reports because the District's attorney said none existed. OAH granted the District's partial dismissal limiting claims to the statute of limitations and removing Section 504 claims.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel District to Conduct Psychological ExaminationOAH denied Parent's request to make the District's school psychologist evaluate Student for a conservatorship capacity declaration, because OAH has no power to issue orders in conservatorship proceedings.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part District's Motion to Quash Student's May 7, 2015 Subpoena of DocumentsOAH quashed most of Student's pre-hearing document subpoena because special education law allows no pre-trial discovery, but ordered District to produce Student's education records, including report cards, testing, IEP-related documents, and maintained e-mails.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Tamalpais to File a Response to Due Process ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to make Tamalpais file a response to the due process complaint. Federal and state law require a district response but do not give an ALJ power to order one.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Production of DocumentsOAH denied District's unopposed motion to compel Student's settlement agreement with LACOE because special education due process cases have no prehearing discovery; documents are obtained only by subpoena duces tecum.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Production of DocumentsOAH denied Student's motion to compel education records because Folsom-Cordova showed it had already produced every requested record that exists, and some requested records were never created.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH partly quashed Oakland's subpoena to Fred Finch Youth Center, allowing treatment records tied to Student's mental condition but blocking contracts, billing, invoices, and correspondence as irrelevant or overly broad.
- Order Quashing Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's two subpoenas duces tecum because they were unsigned and unauthorized, and because they sought documents before hearing, which is impermissible prehearing discovery in special education cases.
- Order Denying Request to Issue Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH denied Student's request for five document subpoenas because the forms were incomplete, lacked a sworn showing of reasonable necessity, had vague or missing record descriptions, and showed no consumer notice compliance.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH partly quashed District's subpoena to Student's residential treatment center, allowing Student's clinical, admission, licensing, structure, and education records but blocking family financial data, publicly available information, and overbroad program-wide requests.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference, Granting Joint Request to Unexpedite and Vacating Expedited Hearing DatesOAH quashed Student's improperly served subpoena for disciplinary records but treated it as an Education Code records request. OAH also granted the joint request to unexpedite because Student raised no discipline-based issues.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel and Quashing SubpoenaOAH denied Student's motion to compel and quashed a subpoena for District transportation emails because special education law allows no prehearing discovery and the emails were conceded not to be education records.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to QuashOAH quashed most of Student's subpoena duces tecum because IDEA hearings allow no prehearing discovery beyond education records, but ordered District to produce Student's assessment results and test protocols within five business days.
- Order Granting Motion to Compel Two Hour Observation of StudentOAH let Temecula observe Student for a full two-hour private behavior therapy session, because Parent sought reimbursement for the services and offered no evidence that the observation would be disruptive.
2014
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH partly quashed San Francisco's subpoena to Student's independent evaluator. Her assessment report and protocols must be produced. Psychotherapy communications and billing records are protected or irrelevant, and attorney-expert communications get in camera review.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH issued Student some subpoenas but denied a subpoena for confidential county human services records and a subpoena for all of Student's District records, because Parent showed no reasonable necessity for them.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum; Order Modifying Subpoena Duces TecumOAH ordered Long Beach to produce staff emails and its policies on independent psycho-educational evaluations, but quashed the request for evaluator contracts and moved production to the first hearing day.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoenas duces tecum because they demanded documents two months before hearing, which amounts to prohibited prehearing discovery, and gave no specific showing of good cause.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed most of District's subpoenas for Student's records from two outside providers as vague and overbroad, but ordered limited stipulated production of assessment records from January 2013 onward.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Student's Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's entire subpoena for District records, emails, and staff evaluations because Student showed only relevance, not the stricter 'reasonable necessity' required in special education hearings.
- Order Following Pre-Hearing Conference, Including Ruling on Student's Motion for Witnesses' AddressesOAH ordered District to give Student's counsel a former employee's home address for subpoena service. It denied the request for current employees, whom District will produce, and for two people District never employed.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference, Continuing the Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing and Ordering Production of Educational RecordsOAH ordered District to produce by July 22, 2014 all educational records Student's counsel had requested under Education Code section 56504, and continued the hearing to September 15, 2014 on joint motion.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference; Continuing Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing and Ordering Production of Educational RecordsOAH ordered Pasadena Unified to produce all educational records Student's counsel had requested under Education Code section 56504 by July 22, 2014, and continued the hearing on the parties' joint motion.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Compel and Motion to QuashOAH ordered District to produce Student's service logs as education records within five business days, but quashed the rest of Student's pre-hearing subpoena because special education law allows no pre-hearing discovery.
- Order Granting, in Part, and Denying, in Part, Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Fountain Valley's subpoenas to nine private providers Student did not plan to use as fishing expeditions, but enforced the subpoena to Student's own expert so the district could cross-examine him.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum as MootOAH denied Student's motion to quash Knightsen's subpoena for records as moot because Knightsen withdrew the subpoena after Student produced many of the requested records.
- Order Denying District's Motions to Quash SubpoenasOAH denied District's four motions to quash Student's subpoenas as moot, because the hearing dates were vacated when Student's amended complaint was accepted and new subpoenas will be needed.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Compel Classroom Observation by Student's CounselOAH denied Student's request to let his attorney observe his classroom before hearing. Student cited no authority treating counsel like an expert, and District showed its own attorneys had not observed Student.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH denied Student's motion to quash Irvine's subpoena for his private therapist's records, finding Student waived privilege by putting his mental and emotional condition at issue.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel Production of Educational RecordsOAH ordered District to give Parent copies of Student's assessment protocols within five business days without requiring a nondisclosure agreement, because parents have a right to copies of school records.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum to Oakland Unified because special education law does not allow prehearing discovery and the subpoena gave no specific showing of why the records were needed.
- Order Granting Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoenas seeking other special education students' files, course catalogs, and A-G applications, finding them vague, overbroad, lacking materiality, and violating consumer-records notice rules.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference, and Continuing Prehearing Conference and Further Order Regarding in Camera Review for Subpoena Duces TecumOAH continued the prehearing conference to March 21, 2014, because the parties were finalizing an interim settlement for independent assessments. It ordered Districts to supply software so the ALJ could view subpoenaed bus surveillance videos.
- Order Granting District's Motion to Compel ObservationOAH granted District a two-hour observation of Student at her private residential placement because Student seeks reimbursement and continued placement there, triggering District's right to observe under Education Code section 56329(d).
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum and Granting Protective OrderOAH denied Student's motion to quash District's subpoenas for Student's personal journal because Student put her mental health at issue and used journal excerpts as an exhibit, but granted a protective order.
- Order Denying District's Motion to Quash Subpoena for Testimony Without PrejudiceOAH denied District's motion to quash Student's subpoena of a school board member without prejudice because District offered no evidence supporting its privilege and official-immunity arguments.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Issued to DistrictOAH quashed Student's subpoena for District staff emails because it demanded production before hearing and Student's attorney gave only a conclusory, boilerplate showing of reasonable necessity.
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Observation of Educational PlacementOAH denied Student's motion to compel an expert observation of Garden Grove's proposed placement as moot, because the district did not object and had already scheduled the observation for March 5, 2014.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum to Falcon Ridge RanchOAH quashed District's subpoena for Student's records from a Utah residential treatment center because District showed no legal authority for a California special education subpoena to reach an out-of-state facility.
- Order Granting Motions to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum to ParentsOAH quashed District's subpoenas seeking Parents' residential placement records because a boilerplate claim that the records were "likely relevant" did not show reasonable necessity, and the requests reached into attorney-client communications.
- Order Denying Request for Expert Observation Before HearingOAH denied Student's motion to let his expert observe him at school before hearing, because his complaint raised only IEE issues, not whether his behavior services were appropriate.
- Order Re: Protection of Video TapesOAH ordered the Districts to give subpoenaed school bus videos to OAH for private judicial review by February 18, 2014, after another student's parent objected to releasing them to Student.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied Student's request for a four-day continuance, but ordered District to give Mother its raw assessment data and protocols the same day, before the hearing on District's assessments.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum; Order Re: Production of Video TapesOAH denied the Districts' motion to quash Student's subpoena for school bus videos because the tapes are Student's education records, but ordered notice to other children's parents and a protective order first.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH denied Student's motion to quash the High School District's subpoena for Island View records because Student put that placement's appropriateness at issue by seeking reimbursement for it and placement there.
- Order Permitting Observation by Student's ExpertOAH ordered Torrance Unified to let Student's second expert observe his current and proposed classes, holding the law guarantees an 'equivalent opportunity' to observe regardless of past observations or expert qualifications.
2013
- Order Granting District's Motion for Observations of StudentOAH let the District's education specialist, speech pathologist, and occupational therapist each observe Student for one hour at his private placement, because Parents placed him there unilaterally and seek public funding.
- Order Denying Motions Concerning Records as MootOAH denied Parents' motions to compel the District to produce Student's records and to respond to a records-amendment request as moot, because the District had already provided the records and responded.
- Order Denying District's Motion to Compel Student to Provide Copy of Entire Hearing RecordOAH denied the District's motion to make Student hand over the entire 3,532-page federal court administrative record, because the remand hearing is limited to the December 11, 2009 IEP.
- Prehearing Conference OrderOAH denied, without prejudice, Student's request that the District produce four witnesses without subpoenas, and set hearing on whether the District's triennial assessments defeat Student's IEE requests.
- Order Following Prehearing ConferenceOAH granted Parent's opposed continuance and denied an untimely request to add a records claim. The District agreed to produce specified records by October 11, 2013, resolving the subpoena dispute.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Granting Continuance, Setting New Prehearing Conference and Hearing Dates, Denying Motion for Reconsideration and Denying Motion to Dismiss ComplaintOAH denied Student's motion to dismiss District's complaint, because special education law has no summary judgment procedure, and denied reconsideration of consolidation for lack of new facts. It granted a continuance and ordered a meet and confer on records.
- Order Granting Request for Reconsideration and Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum as MootOAH granted the District reconsideration of an order quashing its subpoena for records, then denied Student's motion to quash as moot because the District had already told the witness not to comply.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces TecumOAH quashed three subpoenas for Student's probation, social services, and youth services records. The subpoenas were overly broad, did not show reasonable necessity, and demanded production before hearing, which amounts to discovery not allowed in special education cases.
- Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum as MootOAH denied Student's motion to quash the District's records subpoena to Student's speech provider as moot, because the District told the provider not to comply and plans to reissue it for the new hearing date.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed Student's subpoena for District records because special education law does not allow subpoenas to force production of documents before hearing, and the subpoena showed no reasonable necessity.
- Order Granting Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed the District's subpoena for Student's expert's records because it required production on October 2, 2013, before the reset November 14 hearing date, which made it impermissible prehearing discovery.
- Order Denying Student's Motion to Quash SDTOAH denied Student's motion to quash the District's subpoena for UCSF medical records as moot, because the hearing date was vacated and the District conceded it must issue a new subpoena.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to Compel ObservationOAH let Student's private behavioral assessor observe Student at school, but limited the visits to the same three 30-minute sessions District's assessor used, because the law guarantees only an 'equivalent opportunity.'
- Order Denying Motion to Compel Production of DocumentsOAH denied Student's unopposed motion to compel the District to produce assessment records before hearing because the subpoena duces tecum sought prehearing discovery, which special education law does not allow.
- Order Granting/Denying Motion to QuashOAH rejected most of Student's arguments to quash the County Office's subpoena for Probation Department records, finding counsel's affidavit showed reasonable necessity. The order as issued contains no final ruling paragraph.
- Order Granting Student's Motion to Compel Classroom Observation for Independent Education EvaluationOAH ordered District to let Student's IEE assessor observe Student in his current classroom within 14 days, because earlier observations were for prior years and District showed no prejudice.
- Order Following Prehearing Conference Permitting Filing of First Amended Complaint and Denying Motion to QuashOAH let Student amend his complaint to challenge a new May 14, 2013 IEP over District's objection, and denied District's motion to quash as moot after Student withdrew his subpoenas.
- Order Granting/Denying Request for ReconsiderationOAH denied Student's motion to compel his expert's observation of District's proposed placement as not ripe, because District did not object to the observation and gave instructions to arrange it.
- Order Continuing Due Process Hearing and Requiring Disclosure of Witnesses' InformationOAH continued the hearing so a deaf Parent could participate with certified sign language interpreters. It ordered District to accept subpoenas for two former employees or give Student their home addresses.
- Order Following Pre-Hearing ConferenceOAH refused to subpoena a CDE division director because his testimony on whether state special schools enroll students with certificates of completion was irrelevant to whether the schools wrongly declined to assess Student.
- Order Following Pre-Hearing ConferenceOAH quashed Student's subpoena duces tecum because it was not personally served and sought prehearing discovery. Student can still subpoena the documents for the hearing itself.
- Order Quashing Subpoena Duces TecumOAH quashed a subpoena duces tecum that California Children's Services served on Student's attorney, because demanding documents before hearing is prohibited prehearing discovery in special education cases.
- Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Student's Motion to Quash Subpoenas Duces Tecum, and Granting COE's Motion to ContinueOAH quashed COE's subpoenas for records of two past treating doctors who won't testify. It ordered current counselors, HHSA, and Probation to produce records because Student put his mental health at issue.
- Order Quashing Subpoena for Appearance of Deputy District AttorneyOAH quashed Student's subpoena of a San Bernardino County deputy district attorney. Student showed no reasonable necessity for her testimony, and she declared she had no knowledge of Student's educational program.
- Order Granting Motion for Observation by DistrictOAH granted the District's motion to have its autism specialist observe Student for up to two hours at his private school, because Parents are seeking public funding for that unilateral placement.