California OAH special education order · August 16, 2013
Order Granting the District's Request for Reconsideration of Issues Deemed Part of Student's Amended Complaint
OAH Case No. 2013060983 · ALJ Judith Pasewark
OAH granted the District's unopposed reconsideration request. It found Student had withdrawn her July 22 amended complaint, so only the July 25 child find issue remains for hearing.
Summary
The District asked OAH to reconsider an August 8, 2013 order that had treated Student's amended complaint as including two issues from a July 22, 2013 filing plus a child find issue from a July 25, 2013 filing. The District produced a July 22 letter in which Student withdrew the July 22 amended complaint. OAH had never received that letter, and it was not submitted with a declaration. Even so, the ALJ granted reconsideration because its authenticity was not questioned, it logically explained the July 25 filing, and Student's advocate did not oppose; the July 22 issues were dismissed without prejudice, leaving child find as the sole issue.
Why it matters
Parents should confirm that OAH actually receives withdrawal or amendment letters and should respond to reconsideration motions. An unopposed motion can narrow a case to fewer issues, although issues dismissed without prejudice may be raised again later.
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. 2013060983
v. ORDER GRANTING THE DISTRICT’S
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
GRAVENSTEIN UNION SCHOOL OF ISSUES DEEMED PART OF
DISTRICT. STUDENT’S AMENDED COMPLAINT
On August 8, 2013, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order which, in part, determined Student’s amended complaint consisted of the two issues contained in Student’s filing dated July 22, 2013, and the child find issue contained in Student’s July 25, 2013 filing. On August 9, 2013, the District filed this Request for Reconsideration, indicating that this ALJ overlooked Student’s correspondence to OAH dated July 22, 2013, which indicates Student withdrew her July 22, 2013 amended complaint, and intended to submit a more lucid amended complaint at a later date. On July 25, 2013, Student filed an amended complaint which contained only the child find issue. Student has not filed a response or opposition to the District’s Request for Reconsideration.
APPLICABLE LAW
The Office of Administrative Hearings 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
The District has provided a copy of Student’s July 22, 2013 correspondence in which she requests to withdraw her July 22, 2013 amended complaint. Although the correspondence is clearly addressed to OAH, it does not appear in OAH records or the docket for this matter. As it was not received by OAH, it was not an overlooked document for purposes of this ALJ’s original order, nor was the letter submitted on reconsideration pursuant to declaration. In this matter, however, these technicalities represent form over substance. The authenticity of the purported document is not questioned, and its contents present a logical explanation for the submission of the July 25, 2013 child find issue.
Further, Student’s Advocate has not opposed this reconsideration or indicated that the purported July 22, 2013 correspondence is somehow fraudulent. Therefore, the District’s request for reconsideration of the August 8, 2013 Order is granted, in part as it pertains to the determination of issues in Student’s amended complaint.
Accordingly, the District’s request for reconsideration is granted as follows:
1. The issues contained in Student’s amended complaint filed July 22 2013, are
dismissed without prejudice. Student’s amended complaint subsequently filed on July 25, 2013, containing the sole issue of “child find” remains as Student’s amended complaint for due process hearing.
2. Student’s request for due process hearing on this matter shall proceed pursuant to
timeline and hearing dates as currently scheduled.
3. All other orders contained in the August 8, 2013 Order remain in full force and
effect.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 16, 2013 /s/
JUDITH PASEWARK
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings