SM obo EM v Vineland City BOE | Case 09125-21 | 2021-11-09
New Jersey special education due-process decision
- Case number
- 09125-21
- Date
- 11/9/2021
- Parties / district (official listing)
- SM obo EM v Vineland City BOE
Open saved decision PDF · Official source
This page reproduces text extracted from the public decision. The saved PDF controls formatting and wording. No attorney-reviewed summary has been added.
Decision text
Page 1
New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
FINAL DECISION
SUFFICIENCY CHALLENGE
OAL DKT. NO. EDS 09125-21
AGENCY DKT. NO. 2022-33513
S.M. ON BEHALF OF E.M.,
Petitioner,
v.
VINELAND CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION,
Respondent.
_________________________________
Angela Kirwin, Parent Advocate, for petitioner under N.J.A.C. 1:1-5.4(a)(7)
Robert A. Muccilli, Esq., for respondent (Capehart & Scatchard, PA, attorneys)
Record Closed: November 9, 2021 Decided: November 9, 2021
BEFORE BARRY E. MOSCOWITZ, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This decision addresses a sufficiency challenge under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(A),
34 C.F.R. § 300.508(d) (2019), and N.J.A.C. 6A:14-2.7(f).
Page 2
OAL DKT. NO. EDS 09125-21
2
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the documents submitted concerning this sufficiency challenge, I FIND
the following as FACT:
On October 22, 2021, petitioner filed a request for due process hearing with the
Department of Education, Office of Special Education P olicy and Di spute Resolution
(SPDR).
On November 1, 2021, respondent filed a sufficiency challenge with SPDR under
20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(A), 34 C.F.R. § 300.508(d) (2019), and N.J.A.C. 6A:14 -2.7(f), to
determine whether this request for due process hearing meets the requirements of 20
U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A).
On November 3, 2021, SPDR transmitted the case to the Office of Administrative
Law (OAL) under the Administrative Procedure Act, N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to -15, and the act
establishing the Office of Administrative Law, N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -23, for a hearing
under the Uniform Administrative Procedure Rules, N.J.A.C. 1:1-1.1 to -21.6, and the
Special Education Program, N.J.A.C. 1:6A-1.1 to -18.4.
In her request for due process hearing, petitioner writes that she is requesting the
due process hearing because she disagrees with the denial of a fulltime aide for her child.
She states that she disagrees with the data respondent collected during the probationary
period because it does not correlate with the data she collected during her observation of
her child in the classroom. She concludes that this issue could be resolved by reinstating
the fulltime aide.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A), a due process complaint must provide notice of
the following:
Page 3
OAL DKT. NO. EDS 09125-21
3
(I) the name of the child, the address of the residence of
the child (or available contact information in the case of a
homeless child), and the name of the school the child is
attending;
(II) in the case of a homeless child or youth (within the
meaning of section 725(2) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11434a(2)), available contact
information for the child and the name of the school the child
is attending;
(III) a description of the nature of the problem of the child
relating to such proposed initiation or change, including facts
relating to such problem; and
(IV) a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent
known and available to the party at the time.
[20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).]
Likewise, N.J.A.C. 6A:14-2.7(c) requires, among other things, “the specific issues
in dispute, relevant facts, and the relief sought.”
In this case, respondent argues that petitioner ’s submission does not sufficiently
allege relevant facts because petitioner does identify the specific data or observations
with which she disagrees.
I believe that petitioner has provided proper notice of “the specific issues in dispute,
relevant facts, and the relief sought.” Any greater specificity can be learned through
discovery. Accordingly, I CONCLUDE that the notice contained in the request for due
process hearing is sufficient under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A), and that the timelines for
conducting a due process hearing should continue.
ORDER
Given my findings of fact and conclusions of law, I ORDER that the request for due
process hearing is SUFFICIENT, and that the timelines for conducting a due process
hearing shall continue.
Page 4
OAL DKT. NO. EDS 09125-21
4
This decision is final under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(1)(A) and is appealable under 20
U.S.C. § 1415(g)(2) by filing a petition and bringing a civil action in the Law Division of
the Superior Court of New Jersey or in a district court of the United States.
November 9, 2021
DATE BARRY E. MOSCOWITZ, ALJ
Date Received at Agency: November 9, 2021_________________
Date Sent to Parties: November 9, 2021
dr
