California OAH special education order · November 9, 2015
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2015100314 · ALJ Judith Pasewark
OAH denied Student's request to reconsider the refusal to dismiss his own complaint based on a settlement, because the attached settlement agreement and Mother's declaration were not new and were available earlier.
This case went to decision
Student v. Torrance Unified School District: Torrance Unified prevails: Parent's signed acceptance of a one-page settlement offer letter did not create an enforceable settlement agreement. (2016)
Summary
OAH had earlier denied Student's request to dismiss his own due process complaint, because deciding it would require factual findings that amount to summary judgment, which special education law does not allow. Student asked for reconsideration and attached the purported settlement agreement and a declaration from Mother. District did not respond. OAH denied the request because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law: the documents were available before the first request, and OAH still cannot make factual findings on the merits before hearing.
Why it matters
A reconsideration request must rest on genuinely new facts or law, and evidence that was available earlier will not qualify. A party who wants a ruling that a settlement exhausted administrative remedies may need to withdraw the complaint without prejudice and seek that ruling in court.
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. 2015100314 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION
TORRANCE UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On October 21, 2015, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order denying Student’s Request to Dismiss his own Request for Due Process Hearing, finding that doing so would require factual determinations resulting in summary judgment. Special education law does not provide for summary judgment motions. On November 2, 2015, Student filed a Request for Reconsideration of the October 21, 2015 order. District has not filed a response or opposition to Student’s request.
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
Student alleges no new facts, circumstances, or law in support of the request reconsideration. Student has attached a copy of the purported settlement agreement, and a declaration from Mother, which were not presented as part of Student’s initial Request for Dismissal. While these documents may support a finding of a settlement agreement at time of hearing, OAH cannot make factual determinations which result in a summary judgment.
Further, these documents do not represent new information, as the purported settlement agreements, as well as Mother’s information were clearly available to Student prior to filing the request for dismissal. 1 Accordingly, Student’s request for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: November 09, 2015
/S /
JUDITH PASEWARK
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings While the ALJ understands Student’s desire to exhaust administrative remedies, OAH cannot make factual findings on the merits of the case prior to hearing. Student, on the other hand, may withdraw his complaint without prejudice, and seek a determination of exhaustion of administrative remedies through a court of competent jurisdiction.