California OAH special education order · June 9, 2020
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2019090699 · ALJ Cararea Lucier
OAH denied Student's request to reconsider the denial of a second motion to amend, finding no new facts or law and holding the IDEA gives no automatic right to amend a complaint.
Summary
On June 8, 2020, OAH denied Student's second motion to amend the complaint, and Student asked for reconsideration that same day. Los Angeles Unified did not respond. The ALJ denied reconsideration because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law. The ALJ explained that the IDEA says a party "may" amend, which is permissive, so there is no right to amend indefinitely, and the delay from amending must be weighed against the need for a speedy resolution. Student can still file a separate complaint about later issues, including the May 2020 IEP and services during COVID-19 school closures.
Why it matters
Families cannot count on repeatedly amending a pending complaint to add new disputes, and a reconsideration request needs genuinely new facts or law. New issues that come up after the last amendment can be raised in a separate due process complaint.
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)(i)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
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,
v.
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2019090699
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
JUNE 09, 2020
On June 8, 2020, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an order denying Student’s Second Motion to Amend his Complaint. On June 8, 2020, Student filed a Motion for Reconsideration on Second Motion to Amend his Complaint. The Office of Administrative Hearings did not receive a response from Los Angeles Unified School District.
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.
The IDEA does not mandate an automatic right to amend a due process complaint.
Such an interpretation of the IDEA is contrary to the plain language of the statute.
Congress denoted some aspects of title 20 United States Code section 1415 that are mandatory by using the word “shall,” and others that are discretionary by using the word “may.” (20 U.S.C. §1415.) With respect to amending a complaint, a party “may”
amend a complaint under certain circumstances, but is not afforded an absolute right to amend in perpetuity. (20 U.S.C. §1415(c)(2)(E)(i).) Amending a complaint delays the resolution of a special education dispute and must be weighed against the mandate for a speedy resolution of such disputes. (20 U.S.C. §1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II); Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3).) The Administrative Law Judge retains discretion to deny a motion to amend.
Student retains the right to file a complaint with respect to any issues that arose after his filing of the first amended complaint, including substantive issues relating to the May 2020 Individualized Education Program, and Student’s services during the school closures due to the Covid-19 pandemic and public health emergency.
ORDER
Student has not established the June 8, 2020, Order should be reconsidered. The motion for reconsideration is denied. All dates set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Cararea Lucier Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings