California OAH special education order · March 21, 2013
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2012080386 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH denied California Children's Services' request to reconsider dismissing the school district and county office, because CCS only repeated rejected arguments, and warned CCS that more repetition could bring sanctions.
This case went to decision
Student v. California Children's Services (California Department of Health Care Services): California Children's Services must provide weekly OT, compensatory OT and $900 for independent assessments; eight other claims denied. (2013)
Summary
OAH had earlier dismissed Cupertino Union School District and Santa Clara County Office of Education as parties. California Children's Services (CCS) asked OAH to reconsider, arguing that both agencies were required parties because they must provide Student a free appropriate public education. Student opposed the request. OAH denied it because CCS offered no new facts, circumstances, or law and only rehashed arguments OAH had already rejected. The ALJ told CCS to prepare for hearing instead and warned that raising the same contentions again could lead to sanctions.
Why it matters
Reconsideration requires new facts, circumstances, or law. Repeating rejected arguments in longer briefs will not work and can expose a party to sanctions. Parents facing a non-school agency like CCS can expect OAH to keep the case moving toward hearing.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11521
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
- Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2012080386
v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION
CALIFORNIA CHILDREN’S SERVICES.
On February 13, 2013, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order that granted the motion of the Cupertino Union School District (District) and Santa Clara County Office of Education (SCCOE) to be dismissed as parties. On March 18, 2013, California Children’s Services (CCS) filed a request for reconsideration with the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), which asserted that the District and SCCOE are required parties to this action due to their legal requirement to provide Student with a free appropriate public education (FAPE). On March 21, 2013, Student filed an opposition to the request.
The District and SCCOE have not submitted a response.
APPLICABLE LAW
OAH will generally reconsider a ruling upon a showing of new or different facts, circumstances, or law justifying reconsideration, when the party seeks reconsideration within a reasonable period of time. (See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 11521; Code Civ. Proc., § 1008.) The party seeking reconsideration may also be required to provide an explanation for its failure to previously provide the different facts, circumstances or law. (See Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192, 1199-1200.)
DISCUSSION AND ORDER
CCS alleges no new facts, circumstances, or law in support of the request for reconsideration as the moving papers are basically a rehash of prior factual and legal arguments that OAH has rejected, but which CCS believes that if it keeps repeating in longer and longer legal briefs that OAH will capitulate to its wishes. Instead of rehashing the same factual and legal arguments, CCS should prepare to take this matter to hearing if it believes that it is not responsible for providing Student with a FAPE. Further attempts by CCS to raise again the contentions in its request for reconsideration may subject CCS to sanctions.
Accordingly, CCS’ request for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 21, 2013 /s/
PETER PAUL CASTILLO
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings