California OAH special education order · April 30, 2020

Order Denying Request for Reconsideration

OAH Case No. 2019101186 · ALJ Cynthia Fritz

OAH denied Rocklin's motion to reconsider its February 25, 2020 final decision, because Rocklin did not show that OAH still had jurisdiction after issuing the final decision.

Denied Reconsideration

This case went to decision

Student v. Rocklin Unified School District: Rocklin Unified must repay $12,950 in private school tuition and fund 22 counseling hours after wrongly denying eligibility. (2020)

Summary

Rocklin asked OAH to reconsider the final decision issued on February 25, 2020, filing its motion on April 29, 2020 and citing newly acquired facts that it said might have changed the outcome. The ALJ denied the motion for lack of jurisdiction. Rocklin had not shown that OAH kept any authority over the case once the final decision was issued.

Why it matters

Once OAH issues a final decision in a special education case, OAH generally cannot reopen it, even for new facts. A party unhappy with the outcome must appeal to court, so parents can rely on a final decision unless it is challenged there.

Key authority cited

  • Gov. Code, § 11521
  • Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
  • Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192

Topics

reconsideration final decision jurisdiction newly discovered evidence district motion

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.

ROCKLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.

OAH CASE NUMBER 2019101186

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

APRIL 30, 2020

On February 25, 2020, the undersigned administrative law judge, called ALJ, issued a final decision in this matter. On April 29, 2020, Rocklin Unified School District, called Rocklin, filed a motion for reconsideration based upon newly acquired facts.

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

Here, the undersigned ALJ issued a final decision in this matter on February 25,

2020. Rocklin now requests reconsideration due to newly acquired facts. It contends

that these newly acquired facts may have affected the outcome of the case if known at the time of the hearing. Rocklin, however, failed to establish that the Office of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over this matter after the issuance of the February 25, 2020 final decision. Accordingly, Rocklin's motion for reconsideration is denied for lack of jurisdiction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Cynthia Fritz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings