California OAH special education order · June 14, 2016
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2016030723 · ALJ Bob N. Varma
OAH denied Student's request to reconsider the denial of an untimely peremptory challenge, because Student offered no new facts or law and admitted counsel knew of the ALJ assignment on June 10.
This case went to decision
Student v. Laguna Beach Unified School District: Laguna Beach Unified must reimburse $5,491 for private school and speech costs after delaying an IEP meeting; interim placement upheld. (2016)
Summary
Presiding ALJ June Lehrman denied Student's peremptory challenge of ALJ Gorsline as untimely, and Student asked OAH to reconsider. OAH explained that it reconsiders a ruling only when a party shows new or different facts, circumstances, or law. Student showed none. OAH had posted ALJ Gorsline's assignment on its online calendar on June 10, 2016, and Student admitted counsel knew of the assignment that day, so the request was denied.
Why it matters
Deadlines for peremptory challenges run from when OAH assigns the judge, including assignments posted on OAH's online calendar, so counsel must act quickly once an ALJ is assigned. Reconsideration will not fix a missed deadline unless there are truly new facts or law.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11521
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
- Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
People named in the order
- June Lehrman, Presiding Administrative Law Judge
- Gorsline, Administrative Law Judge assigned to hear the matter
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. 2016030723 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION
LAGUNA BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On June 13, 2016, Presiding Administrative Law Judge June Lehrman denied Student’s peremptory challenge of ALJ Gorsline on the grounds that the challenge was untimely. On June 13, 2016, after close of business, Student filed a request for reconsideration.
APPLICABLE LAW, DISCUSSION AND ORDER
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.)
Student has provided no new facts or law. OAH updated its official online calendar on June 10, 2016, and assigned ALJ Gorsline to hear this matter. In a request for clarification filed on June 13, 2016, and in the request for reconsideration, Student admits that counsel was aware of the assignment of ALJ Gorsline on June 10, 2016. As there are no new facts or law, the request for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: June 14, 2016
BOB N. VARMA
Division Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings