California OAH special education order · September 22, 2020
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2020080641 · ALJ Adrienne L. Krikorian
OAH denied Student's request to reconsider the stay put denial because Parent's declaration about the district not implementing the IEP during the Covid-19 closure was irrelevant to stay put.
Summary
OAH had denied Student's stay put motion, finding that stay put is the January 13, 2020 IEP and refusing Student's request to change it to an at-home model for one-to-one behavior services. Student asked OAH to reconsider and filed a declaration from Parent saying San Diego Unified had not implemented the IEP after March 13, 2020, during the Covid-19 school closure. San Diego Unified opposed. OAH denied reconsideration because the declaration did not bear on what the stay put placement is, so Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law.
Why it matters
Reconsideration needs new facts or law that actually affect the earlier ruling. Showing that a district failed to implement an IEP during school closures does not change what stay put is. That claim belongs in the due process case itself, not in a stay put request.
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.
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020080641
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
SEPTEMBER 22, 2020
On September 18, 2020, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an order denying Student’s motion for stay put. Specifically, the September 18, 2020 Order concluded that “Student’s stay put during the pendency of this action is her January 13, 2020 IEP, unless or until an IEP team changes the IEP and Parent consents”. OAH denied the motion for stay put based upon Student’s request for OAH to change the January 13, 2020 IEP to an “at-home” model for one-to-one behavior services.
Student timely filed a Motion for Reconsideration on September 18, 2020. San Diego Unified filed an opposition on September 22, 2020.
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.)
Here, Student’s Motion included a declaration from Parent asserting that, during the Covid-19 school closure, San Diego Unified did not implement Student’s January 13, 2020 IEP after March 13, 2020. The declaration was irrelevant to the issue of stay put as it relates to the January 13, 2020 IEP. As such, Student’s motion offers no new facts, circumstances, or law justifying reconsideration. The Motion for Reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Adrienne L. Krikorian Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings