California OAH special education order · August 4, 2014
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration and Denying Request to Expedite Hearing
OAH Case No. 2014070965, 2014060819 · ALJ Joy Redmon
OAH denied Student's request to undo the consolidation of two cases against Lincoln, finding no new facts, and refused an expedited hearing because neither case raised disciplinary issues.
Summary
OAH had consolidated two of Student's due process cases against Lincoln. Student asked OAH to reconsider and separate the cases, arguing that one involved extended school year and the other the regular school year, or else to expedite the hearing. OAH denied reconsideration because Student offered no new facts or law, admitted the same witnesses would testify in both cases, and both complaints alleged denials of FAPE over overlapping time periods. OAH also denied the expedited hearing because special education law allows expedited hearings only for disciplinary matters such as manifestation determinations, and neither case raised such issues. All consolidated dates stayed in place.
Why it matters
A party seeking reconsideration must show new facts or law, not repeat earlier arguments. Expedited hearings are available only for disciplinary-placement disputes, so parents cannot use them to speed up ordinary FAPE claims.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11521
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
- Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(4)(B)
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 Consolidated Matters of:
STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2014070965 v.
LINCOLN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2014060819 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING
LINCOLN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. REQUEST TO EXPEDITE HEARING
On August 1, 2014, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order consolidating two cases filed by Student against the Lincoln Unified School District (Lincoln). On August 1, 2014, Student filed a Motion for Reconsideration requesting the cases be severed, or in the alternative, that an expedited hearing be set.
APPLICABLE LAW
Reconsideration 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.)
Expedited Hearing When a school district changes the placement of a special education student for specific conduct that violates the student code of conduct, the student is entitled to certain procedural protections. A parent who disagrees with any decision regarding a determination that the alleged conduct is not a manifestation of the student’s disability may request a hearing. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)(A).) The hearing held pursuant to this section is expedited and will be conducted within 20 school days of the hearing request. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(4)(B).) Special education law does not provide for any other type of expedited hearing.
DISCUSSION
Request for Reconsideration Student did not present new or different facts justifying reconsideration of the original order consolidating the matters. In his request, Student acknowledges that the same witnesses will be called in each case. Student asserts that the matters are, “not the same scope,” because one case deals with the extended school year and the other case only the school year. The facts asserted in both complaints, however, allege a denial of a free appropriate public education during overlapping time periods including extended school years in both matters. The request for reconsideration is denied.
Request for Expedited Hearing Student did not raise any disciplinary issues in either case meeting the legal criteria for an expedited hearing. Student asserts that the hearing should be expedited or the matter proceed to hearing on the dates set in the original case. The request for an expedited hearing is denied. Further, as noted in the original consolidation order, the time for the resolution period in the second case has not yet run. That fact was taken into consideration when calendaring the consolidated matter. Accordingly, the dates set will stand.
ORDER
1. Student’s Motion for Reconsideration is denied.
2. Student’s Request for Expedited Hearing is denied.
3. All dates set in the consolidated matter are to remain on calendar.
DATE: August 4, 2014
/S/
JOY REDMON
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings