California OAH special education order · July 6, 2018
Order Granting Request for Reconsideration; Vacating Continued Hearing Dates
OAH Case No. 2018060311 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH granted District's reconsideration request and vacated the continued hearing dates because District admitted it had filed its continuance request in the wrong case and lacked Student's agreement.
Summary
OAH had granted District's request to continue the hearing based on District's statement that Student agreed to the new dates. District then asked OAH to reconsider, admitting it had filed the continuance request in the wrong case and did not have Student's agreement. OAH found these were new facts that justified reconsideration. It vacated the continued dates and restored the original schedule, with the prehearing conference on July 20, 2018 and the hearing on August 1, 2018.
Why it matters
A continuance granted on a mistaken claim that the other side agreed can be undone. Parents should check that any 'stipulated' continuance in their case actually reflects their agreement.
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. 2018060311 v. ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION; VACATING
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL CONTINUED HEARING DATES
DISTRICT.
On July 3, 2018, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order that granted Los Angeles Unified School District’s continuance request based upon an assurance from District that Student agreed upon the continued dates. On July 5, 2018, District filed a request for reconsideration based upon its admission that it filed the continuance request for the incorrect case.
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 District alleges new facts and circumstances in support of the request reconsideration, as it made the request for the incorrect case, and does not have presently Student’s concurrence for a continuance.
Accordingly, District’s request for reconsideration is granted, and the hearing dates in the July 3, 2018 continuance order vacated. The matter will be scheduled for the dates in the June 7, 2018 scheduling order.
ORDER
District’s Motion for Reconsideration is granted.
Based upon reconsideration the matter is set as follows:
MEDIATION REQUESTS, PREHEARING CONFERENCE MOTION(S) & PREHEARING
CONFERENCE STATEMENTS
LAST DAY 07/17/2018
TO FILE This deadline does not include motions with specific statutory timelines. Any motions filed after this due date must show good cause as to why it was not filed timely.
TELEPHONIC PREHEARING CONFERENCE
DATE: 07/20/2018
TIME: 1:00PM
DUE PROCESS HEARING
DATE: 08/01/2018
TIME: 9:30AM
LOCATION: Office of Administrative Hearings 15350 Sherman Way, Suite 300 Van Nuys, CA 91406
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: July 6, 2018
PETER PAUL CASTILLO
Presiding Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings