California OAH special education order · April 19, 2018
Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2018040361 · ALJ Kara Hatfield
OAH denied Student's motion to reconsider the denial of stay put because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law and only restated arguments from the original motion.
Summary
OAH denied Student's motion for stay put on April 12, 2018, and Student asked for reconsideration the next day. San Luis Coastal Unified School District opposed. OAH denied reconsideration because Student only restated or emphasized the facts and law from the original motion. Student also did not identify anything new or explain why any new material could not have been included in the original motion or reply brief.
Why it matters
A motion for reconsideration will fail if it simply reargues the original motion. Parents should put all their facts and law into the first stay put motion, and if they ask for reconsideration, they must clearly point out what is new and explain why it was not raised earlier.
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. 2018040361 v. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION
SAN LUIS COASTAL UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On April 12, 2018, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order that denied Student’s motion for stay put. On April 13, 2018, Student filed a motion for reconsideration. On April 18, 2018, San Luis Coastal Unified School District filed an opposition to the motion.
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
Reconsideration Student alleges no new facts, circumstances, or law in support of the request reconsideration, but merely restates or emphasizes facts, circumstances, and law stated in his original motion. If any information asserted in Student’s motion for reconsideration is in fact new, Student does not specify what is new, and why any facts, circumstances, or law included for the first time in the motion for reconsideration could not have been provided in his original motion or the reply brief Student filed.
Accordingly, Student’s request for reconsideration is denied.
ORDER
Student’s motion for reconsideration is denied.
DATE: April 19, 2018
KARA HATFIELD
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings