California OAH special education order · November 16, 2018
Order Denying Requests for Reconsideration Regarding Orders Denying Stay Put and Consolidation
OAH Case No. 2018110130 · ALJ Penelope S. Pahl
OAH denied Student's refiled stay put and consolidation motions, treated as reconsideration requests, because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law and no sworn declaration explaining the duplicate filings.
Summary
OAH had already denied Student's stay put request because there was no dispute about Student's placement. It had also denied consolidation, because the charter school's request was for mediation only and cannot be consolidated with a due process case. Student then refiled two emergency stay put motions and a second consolidation motion without acknowledging the earlier orders. OAH treated all three as motions for reconsideration and denied them, because they presented nothing new and lacked a sworn declaration explaining why the same motions were filed again.
Why it matters
Refiling a motion that OAH has already denied will be treated as a reconsideration request. To succeed, it must show new facts, circumstances, or law, and explain why that information was not offered the first time.
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:
OAH Case No. 2018110130
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
ORDER DENYING REQUESTS FOR
v. RECONSIDERATION REGARDING
SKY MOUNTAIN CHARTER SCHOOL ORDERS DENYING STAY PUT AND
AND INNOVATIVE EDUCATION CONSOLIDATION
MANAGEMENT, INC.
On November 6, 2014, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order denying Student’s Request for Stay Put on the grounds that no dispute as to Student’s placement exists. On November 7, 2018, the undersigned issued an order denying Student’s request to consolidate his case with Sky Mountain Charter and Innovative Education Management Inc’s request for mediation only as a request for mediation does not involve a request for due process hearing and therefore cannot be consolidated.
On November 13, 2018, Student filed two additional motions, both entitled, “Motion for Emergency Stay Put-Notice of Errata”. Also on November 13, 2018, Student filed a second “Motion for Consolidation.” None of these three motions acknowledged that orders on these matters had previously been issued. All three motions are being considered to be motions for reconsideration on behalf of Student.
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 these requests for reconsideration. Nor is either the motion for Stay Put or the motion to consolidate accompanied by a sworn declaration by Student explaining the basis for the duplicative motions. Accordingly, Student’s motion for reconsideration of the previous order denying Stay Put is DENIED. Student’s motion for reconsideration of the previous order denying consolidation is also DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: November 16, 2018
PENELOPE S. PAHL
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings