California OAH special education order · November 5, 2018
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration; Order Granting Motion to Amend Complaint
OAH Case No. 2018070284 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH denied Student's request to reconsider leaving out an unpled issue because no new facts or law were shown, but let Student amend the complaint, resetting all timelines.
Summary
At the prehearing conference, the ALJ refused to add an issue claiming Saddleback Valley denied Student a FAPE by not timely filing for due process, because the complaint did not clearly plead it. Student asked for reconsideration and, in the alternative, for leave to amend. Saddleback Valley did not oppose either request. OAH denied reconsideration because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law, but granted the timely motion to amend, deemed the amended complaint filed on the order date, and reset all timelines.
Why it matters
Reconsideration requires new facts, circumstances, or law, so it rarely fixes a pleading gap. When an issue was left out of the complaint, asking to amend is usually the better route, but amending restarts the hearing timelines.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11521
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
- Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)
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. 2018070284 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION; ORDER
SADDLEBACK VALLEY UNIFIED GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND
SCHOOL DISTRICT. COMPLAINT
On October 29, 2018, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order following the October 29, 2018 prehearing conference, setting forth the issues for hearing.
Specifically, Saddleback Valley objected to and the ALJ denied Student’s request to include an issue for hearing that Saddleback Valley denied Student a free appropriate public education by failing to timely request a due process hearing, as that issue was not clearly pled in Student’s complaint. On October 30, 2018, Student filed a request for reconsideration.
On October 30, 2018, Student filed a motion to amend her complaint in the event OAH denied her request for reconsideration. No opposition was filed by Saddleback Valley as to the request for reconsideration or motion to amend.
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.)
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
Reconsideration Student alleges no new facts, circumstances, or law in support of the request for reconsideration. Accordingly, Student’s request for reconsideration is denied.
Motion to Amend The motion to amend is timely and is granted. The amended complaint shall be deemed filed on the date of this order. All applicable timelines shall be reset as of the date of this order. OAH will issue a scheduling order with the new dates.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: November 5, 2018
ROMMEL P. CRUZ
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings