California OAH special education order · April 24, 2014
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2014030894 · ALJ Laurie Gorsline
OAH denied Parent's request to reconsider moving the hearing venue from Twin Rivers' office to OAH because Parent never served the motion on the District.
This case went to decision
Student v. Twin Rivers Unified School District (consolidated): Twin Rivers Unified must provide 34 hours of compensatory behavior services; its special day class offer may be implemented. (2014)
Summary
Parent asked OAH to reconsider its earlier order refusing to move the May 20, 2014 due process hearing from Twin Rivers' office to OAH's Sacramento office. Parent offered one new fact: she is not comfortable at the District's office. OAH denied the request because Parent admitted she had not served the motion on Twin Rivers, which normally gets three business days to respond. OAH said Parent may refile with facts showing why OAH is more reasonably convenient, plus proof of service on all parties.
Why it matters
Every motion must be served on the other side, or OAH can deny it without reaching the merits. To move a hearing location, a parent must show the new site is more reasonably convenient for the family, and personal discomfort alone may not be enough.
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. 2014030894 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION
TWIN RIVERS UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICTS.
On April 16, 2014, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order denying Parent’s motion to move the venue of the May 20, 2014 due process hearing from Twin Rivers Unified School District (Twin Rivers) office to the Office of Administrative Hearings’ (OAH) Sacramento office.
On April 23, 2014, Student filed a letter, dated April 22, 2014, which OAH deems a motion for reconsideration of the prior order (Motion). Student again seeks to have the hearing venue moved to OAH. Student alleges that having the hearing at Twin Rivers’ office gives Twin Rivers an unfair advantage and that Parent is not comfortable at its office. There is no opposition from Twin Rivers and Parent states that she did not serve Motion on Twin Rivers.
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 motion to change venue was denied on April 16, 2014, because Student failed to make the showing necessary to justify a change in location based upon “reasonable convenience” of Student or his parents.
Here, Parent alleges one new fact in support of Motion. The new fact is that Parent is not comfortable at Twin Rivers’ office. However, Parent also states she did not serve Motion on Twin Rivers and there is no indication that Twin Rivers is aware that Motion has been filed. Generally, motions must be served on the opposing party. OAH then permits the opposing party three business days to respond to a motion before a ruling will be made. If Parent is seeking reconsideration of the April 16, 2014 order, Parent must resubmit Motion with supporting facts to demonstrate why OAH is more reasonably convenient to Student and Parent for holding the hearing, along with proof that Motion was sent to all parties in this matter. Based upon the failure to serve Twin Rivers with Motion, Student’s request for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: April 24, 2014 /s/
LAURIE GORSLINE
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings
