California OAH special education order · January 7, 2016
Order Setting Briefing Schedule on Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2015111024 · ALJ June R. Lehrman
OAH denied Student's request for oral argument and for the Division Presiding ALJ to review the order refusing to unexpedite, but took reconsideration under submission and ordered simultaneous briefing.
Summary
Student asked OAH to reconsider a December 28, 2015 order that denied Student's second request to take the hearing off the expedited track. Student wanted oral argument and wanted the Division Presiding ALJ, rather than the judge who issued the order, to decide the request. The Presiding ALJ denied both of those requests but agreed to consider reconsideration herself. She ordered both sides to file simultaneous briefs of up to 15 pages by January 13, 2016, addressing two questions: how Student's claims differ from a discipline 'appeal' under 20 U.S.C. section 1415(k)(3), and whether the mandatory 20-school-day expedited hearing timeline in section 1415(k)(4)(B) applies to Student's claims.
Why it matters
Reconsideration requests generally go to the judge who issued the original order, not to a higher-ranking ALJ, and OAH may decide them on written briefs without oral argument. Families who want to move a discipline-related case off the expedited track need to explain clearly why their claims are not a section 1415(k)(3) appeal.
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)
- 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 Matter of:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2015111024 v. ORDER SETTING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE ON REQUEST FOR
CASTAIC UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT. RECONSIDERATION
On December 28, 2015, the undersigned Presiding Administrative Law Judge issued an Order Denying Student’s Second Request to Unexpedite Hearing.
On January 5, 2016, Student filed a Motion for Reconsideration addressed to the Division Presiding Administrative Law Judge, seeking oral argument.
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
The request for oral argument is denied, as is the request for the Division PALJ to reconsider the undersigned PALJ’s order. However, Student’s request for reconsideration of the December 28, 2015 Order is taken under submission by the undersigned, pending further briefing.
Briefs shall be simultaneous by both sides, no longer than 15 pages, and shall be due by close of business on Wednesday January 13, 2016. Briefs should cite any applicable legislative history or case law that may address: (a) the distinction Student contends exists between Student’s allegations and an “appeal” pursuant to Section 1415 (k)(3); and (b) the non-applicability as Student’s contends to his allegations, of the mandatory provisions of Section 1415 (k)(4)(B) which state: “the State or local educational agency shall arrange for an expedited hearing, which shall occur within 20 school days of the date the hearing is requested and shall result in a determination within 10 school days after the hearing.”
ORDER
1. The request for oral argument is denied.
2. The request that the Division Presiding Administrative Law Judge reconsider the
December 28, 2015 Order, is denied.
3. Student’s request for reconsideration of the December 28, 2015 Order is taken
under submission.
4. Further briefing shall be due by Wednesday, January 13, 2016, at which time the
matter shall be deemed submitted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: January 7, 2016
/ S/
JUNE R. LEHRMAN
Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings