California OAH special education order · August 31, 2017
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2017080768 · ALJ Rebecca Freie
OAH denied Student's request to reconsider a stay put denial on speech services because Student offered no new facts or law, and the parties already agreed on the stay put speech services.
Summary
OAH had denied Student's stay put motion. Student then asked OAH to reconsider that order as it applied to speech and language services. OAH denied the request because Student raised no new facts, circumstances, or law. The parties also agreed that Student's stay put includes two 50-minute speech sessions a week (one one-to-one pull-out and one push-in), and Student did not claim she was not receiving them, so no order was needed.
Why it matters
Reconsideration requires new facts, circumstances, or law. OAH generally will not issue a stay put order for services the district does not dispute and is already providing.
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. 2017080768 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION
MARTINEZ UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On August 23, 2017, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order that denied Student’s motion for stay put. On August 31, 2017, Student filed a motion for reconsideration of the order as it pertains to speech and language services.
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
Student alleges no new facts, circumstances, or law in support of the request reconsideration. Student agrees with the ALJ that the parties do not dispute that she is entitled to two fifty minute speech and language sessions per week, with one a 50 minute one-to-one pull-out session, and another 50 minutes of push-in speech and language therapy, and this is stay put. Student does not claim that she is not receiving these services. Since there is no dispute between the parties that these are stay put services, there is no need for an order saying so. Accordingly, Student’s motion for reconsideration is denied.
ORDER
Student’s motion for reconsideration is denied. .
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: August 31, 2017
REBECCA FREIE
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings