California OAH special education order · June 4, 2019
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2019040157 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH denied Student's request to undo the dismissal of his amended complaint, because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law showing his claims were not barred by a December 2018 settlement agreement.
Summary
On May 22, 2019, OAH dismissed Student's amended complaint because a December 18, 2018 final settlement agreement and release barred his claims. Parent then filed a "Request for Appeal," which OAH treated as a motion for reconsideration because OAH does not hear appeals of its own orders. San Diego Unified opposed. OAH denied the request because Student did not present any new or different facts, circumstances, or law explaining why the settlement should not bar the claims.
Why it matters
OAH cannot hear an appeal of its own order, and a reconsideration request must point to new facts, circumstances, or law, not just disagreement with the ruling. Families should read settlement releases carefully before signing, because a signed release can block later due process claims.
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. 2019040157 v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On May 22, 2019, the undersigned administrative law judge issued an order that dismissed Student’s amended complaint on the grounds that Student’s claims were barred by a December 18, 2018 final settlement agreement and release entered into by the parties.
On May 28, 2019, Parent on behalf of Student filed a with the Office of Administrative Hearings a “Request for Appeal,” which was served on San Diego Unified on May 30, 2019, which the Office of Administrative Hearings is treating as a request for reconsideration on the May 22, 2019 order. On June 3, 2019, San Diego Unified filed an opposition.
APPLICABLE LAW
OAH 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 While Student’s motion is titled “Request for Appeal,” it is in fact a Motion for Reconsideration, as OAH does not hear appeals of its orders. Student’s motion requests that an order be issued that sets aside the May 22, 2019 order dismissing Student’s amended complaint. In his motion for reconsideration, Student fails to allege new facts, circumstances, or law in support of the request for reconsideration. Specifically, Student fails to allege new or different facts or law, as to why Student’s claims raised in his amended complaint should not barred by the December 18, 2018 settlement agreement and should be permitted to proceed to hearing.
Accordingly, Student’s motion for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: June 4, 2019
ROMMEL P. CRUZ
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings