California OAH special education order · November 8, 2017

Order Granting Request for Reconsideration and Granting Student's Motion to Amend Due Process Complaint

OAH Case No. 2017061033 · ALJ Rita Defilippis

OAH granted Antioch's request for reconsideration because the amendment order issued before its opposition deadline, but again allowed Student to amend, rejecting the District's untimeliness and prejudice arguments.

Ruling Reconsideration

This case went to decision

Student v. Antioch Unified School District: Antioch Unified wins child find case; pre-June 2015 claims time-barred and summer break delayed assessment deadline. (2018)

Summary

Antioch asked OAH to reconsider an order letting Student amend the due process complaint. Antioch said the order issued before its time to oppose had run and without considering its opposition declaration. OAH granted reconsideration because the request was filed the same day as the order. After weighing Antioch's arguments, OAH again granted the amendment and rejected the claim that a motion filed 11 days before hearing was untimely and prejudicial. OAH did not decide Antioch's statute of limitations argument and said the District could raise it in a separate motion.

Why it matters

A district's work preparing for hearing on the original complaint does not by itself block an amendment. Federal law lets the ALJ allow an amendment any time more than five days before hearing, and the amendment restarts the hearing timelines. Statute of limitations defenses must be raised in a separate motion.

Key authority cited

  • 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)
  • 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(ii)
  • Gov. Code, § 11521
  • Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
  • Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192

Topics

reconsideration amended complaint timeliness prejudice statute of limitations

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. 2017061033 v. ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR

RECONSIDERATION AND

ANTIOCH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. GRANTING STUDENT’S MOTION TO

AMEND DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT

On November 6, 2017, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order that granted Student’s Motion to Amend and denied Student’s Motion to Quash. On November 6, 2017, Antioch Unified School District filed a request for reconsideration.

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

Request for Reconsideration Antioch requests reconsideration on the grounds that the undersigned ALJ issued an order granting Student’s Motion to Amend prior to the expiration of time allowed for Antioch to oppose the Motion to Amend, and without considering Antioch’s declaration opposing the Motion to Amend which was filed subsequent to the order.

The request for reconsideration is timely because it was received the same day as the issuance of the order.

Accordingly, Antioch’s request for reconsideration is Granted.

Motion to Amend Due Process Complaint

APPLICABLE LAW

An amended complaint may be filed when either (a) the other party consents in writing and is given the opportunity to resolve the complaint through a resolution session, or (b) the hearing officer grants permission, provided the hearing officer may grant such permission at any time more than five (5) days prior to the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i).) The filing of an amended complaint restarts the applicable timelines for the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C. § 1415 (c)(2)(E)(ii).)

DISCUSSION

Antioch’s opposition to Student’s amended complaint is based on claims that Student’s amended complaint is time barred by the statute of limitations, and that the filing of Student’s Motion to Amend within 11 days of the due process hearing is not justified and is untimely and prejudicial to Antioch because Counsel for Antioch already prepared for the due process hearing on Student’s original complaint.

On reconsideration, the undersigned ALJ’s order granting Student’s Motion to Amend was proper. Antioch’s claim that Student’s amended complaint is untimely and prejudicial to Antioch is rejected. Student’s amended complaint was filed within 5 days of the scheduled due process hearing. Antioch’s claim that Student’s amended complaint is time barred is not decided in this reconsideration and Antioch may file a separate motion regarding that claim.

ORDER

Antioch’s Motion for Reconsideration is Granted.

Based on reconsideration of Student’s Motion to Amend, Student’s Motion to Amend is Granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: November 8, 2017

RITA DEFILIPPIS

Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings