Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05400/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05400-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 20:1401 Education: Handicapped Child Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1Defendant brought this motion by letter brief dated October 24, 2005. Plaintiffs responded in a letter

brief dated October 27, 2005.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

K.H., by and through her parents, MICHAEL AND

ALANY HELMANTOLER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MT. DIABLO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant.

 /

No. C 04-05400 SI

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO INTRODUCE REBUTTAL

EVIDENCE

By letter briefs,1the parties bring before the Court a dispute over whether defendant may introduce

additional evidence in this appeal from a decision of the California SpecialEducationHearing Office. For the

following reasons, the Court GRANTS defendant’s request.

In an October 19, 2005, Order, the Court granted plaintiffs’ request to supplement the administrative

record in this matter. The Court permitted plaintiffs to introduce declarations and testimony from Carina M.

Grandison, Ph.D., Merrilee P. McBride, M.Ed., and JudithPaton, M.A. Defendant now moves to supplement

the record with the testimony of Dena Zacharia. Zacharia will provide testimony, as well as documentary

evidence fromthe AmericanSpeech-Language-Hearing Association, to rebut the additional evidence plaintiffs

intend to introduce.

As discussed in its October 19, 2005, Order, this Court has broad discretion to accept additional

evidence when the proffered evidence is not cumulative of the administrative record. See Ojai Unified Sch.

Dist.v. Jackson, 4 F.3d 1467, 1472-73 (9th Cir. 1993). Defendant has informed the Court that the additional

Case 3:04-cv-05400-SI Document 62 Filed 11/07/05 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

evidence it seeks to introduce is non-cumulative, and will only be used to rebut the supplemental evidence

offered by plaintiffs. The Court believes defendant should be afforded the opportunity to address plaintiffs’

additional evidence. Defendant’s motion is therefore GRANTED.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown, the Court hereby GRANTS defendant’s motion

to introduce rebuttal evidence.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 4, 2005

 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-05400-SI Document 62 Filed 11/07/05 Page 2 of 2