California OAH special education order · March 18, 2020
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2020020250 · ALJ Cararea Lucier
OAH denied Parent's request to reconsider the dismissal of Student's complaint because Parent offered no new facts, circumstances, or law, only an argument that the ALJ misunderstood Student's theory.
Summary
On March 10, 2020, OAH granted Anaheim Union's motion to dismiss Student's complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The next day, Parent filed a motion to vacate default judgment, which OAH treated as a motion for reconsideration; Anaheim Union did not respond. OAH denied the motion because Parent argued only that the ALJ misunderstood Student's theory of the case and did not present new or different facts, circumstances, or law. The dismissal order was confirmed.
Why it matters
Reconsideration requires new or different facts, circumstances, or law, not just disagreement with the ALJ's reading of the complaint. Families whose complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction may do better to refile with claims OAH can hear than to reargue the same complaint.
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,
v.
ANAHEIM UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020020250
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
MARCH 18, 2020
On March 10, 2020, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an order granting Anaheim Union High School District’s motion to dismiss Student’s complaint.
On March 11, 2020, Parent, on behalf of Student, filed a motion to vacate default judgement, which is deemed a motion for reconsideration. The Office of Administrative Hearings did not receive a response from Anaheim Union.
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
Parent’s Motion does not raise new facts, circumstances or law to support reconsideration. Parent asserts that the dismissal should be reversed because the undersigned ALJ misunderstood Student’s theory of the case in the underlying complaint. However, Parent offered no new facts or law that supported reconsideration of the Order, which granted dismissal because OAH had no jurisdiction over the claims in the complaint.
ORDER
Student has not established the March 10, 2020, Order granting Anaheim Union’s motion to dismiss should be reconsidered. The motion for reconsideration is denied.
The Order of Dismissal is confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Cararea Lucier Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings