California OAH special education order · August 2, 2019

Order Denying Request for Reconsideration

OAH Case No. 2019070090 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz

OAH denied Student's request to reconsider the dismissal of settlement-barred claims, because Student offered no new facts or law, and whether the settlement was rescinded is outside OAH's jurisdiction.

Denied Reconsideration

Summary

Parent asked OAH to reconsider its July 18, 2019 order dismissing claims barred by a March 21, 2018 settlement agreement, the two-year statute of limitations, and OAH's jurisdictional limits. Student argued Parent had rescinded the agreement because of Glendora Unified's alleged non-performance, and also argued that rescission required an evidentiary hearing. Glendora Unified did not respond. OAH denied the request because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law. It also held that whether the agreement was rescinded under Civil Code section 1689 is a question for a trier of fact other than OAH, so OAH must treat the agreement's waiver of past claims through April 2, 2018 as still in effect.

Why it matters

A parent cannot get around a settlement's waiver of past claims at OAH just by sending the district a notice of rescission. Until a court with jurisdiction finds the agreement unenforceable, OAH will treat the waiver as binding.

Key authority cited

  • Gov. Code, § 11521
  • Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
  • Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
  • Civ. Code, § 1689, subd. (b)(2)
  • Y.G. v. Riverside Unified Sch. Dist. (C.D. Cal. 2011) 774 F.Supp.2d 1055

Topics

reconsideration settlement agreement rescission jurisdiction waiver of claims

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,

v.

GLENDORA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.

OAH CASE NUMBER 2019070090

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

On July 18, 2019, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an order dismissing Student’s claims barred by a settlement agreement, the two-year statute of limitations, and claims outside the jurisdiction of the Office of Administrative Hearings, commonly referred to as OAH. On July 29, 2019, Parent on behalf of Student filed a Request for Reconsideration of the July 18, 2019 findings and orders. OAH did not receive a response from Glendora Unified.

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, generally within ten days. (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

Student offers no new facts, circumstances or law to support reconsideration.

Instead, Student provides inconsistent positions to support his request. On one hand, Student argues that the March 21, 2018 Compromise and Release Agreement has been unilaterally extinguished as Parent provided written notice to Glendora Unified of her rescission of the Agreement due to Glendora Unified’s alleged non-performance. Yet, on the other hand, Student argues that the issue of whether the Agreement has been rescinded pursuant to California Civil Code section 1689, subsection (b)(2), requires an evidentiary hearing to be heard by a trier of fact. Glendora Unified takes the position that the Agreement remains enforceable. Whether the Agreement is enforceable or has been extinguished under section 1689 is a matter to be determined by a trier of fact.

However, that trier of fact cannot be OAH, as such a claim is outside OAH’s jurisdiction.

(Y.G. v. Riverside Unified Sch. Dist. (C.D. Cal. 2011) 774 F.Supp.2d 1055, 1061-1062.)

Therefore, as no determination has been made by a trier of fact that the terms of the March 21, 2018 Agreement are no longer enforceable and thus extinguished, OAH must assume the Agreement entered into by the parties, specifically the waiver of past claims through April 2, 2018, remains in effect.

Student failed to establish why the July 18, 2019 Order should be reconsidered.

Accordingly, the motion for reconsideration is denied. All dates set in this matter are confirmed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 2, 2019 Rommel P. Cruz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings