California OAH special education order · April 16, 2021
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration of Order Granting Student's Motion to Amend
OAH Case No. 2021010236 · ALJ Cole Dalton
OAH denied San Marcos's request to reconsider the order letting Student amend her complaint because the district offered no new facts, circumstances, or law and only objected to the new hearing dates.
Summary
After OAH granted Student's motion to amend her due process complaint, San Marcos filed an opposition the same day, which OAH treated as a motion for reconsideration. San Marcos's only objection was to the new hearing dates set in OAH's scheduling order after the amendment. OAH denied reconsideration because San Marcos offered no new facts, circumstances, or law about the amendment itself, and it confirmed all dates. The ALJ explained that the proper way to change hearing dates is to meet and confer and file a joint continuance request supported by a declaration showing good cause.
Why it matters
A party cannot use a reconsideration request to fight the hearing dates that follow an amended complaint. To change dates, the parties should meet and confer and file a joint continuance request showing good cause.
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 MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2021010236
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF
ORDER GRANTING STUDENT’S MOTION TO AMEND
APRIL 16, 2021
On April 9, 2021, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge, referred to as ALJ, issued an order granting Student’s motion to amend her due process complaint.
Subsequently, on April 9, 2021, San Marcos filed an opposition to Student’s motion to amend, which Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, considers a motion for reconsideration. OAH did not receive a response from Student.
APPLICABLE LAW
OAH 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
San Marcos offers no new facts, circumstances, or law to support reconsideration.
San Marcos opposes Student’s motion to amend for the sole reason that it disagrees with the new dates set for hearing.
On April 9, 2021, the undersigned ALJ issued an order granting Student’s motion to amend and provided that OAH would set new hearing dates. Subsequently OAH’s April 9, 2021 scheduling order set new dates for hearing. San Marcos opposes dates set for hearing in the scheduling order. San Marcos offers no new facts, circumstances, or law relating to the underlying motion to amend.
The proper remedy for seeking a change in hearing dates is to meet and confer with opposing counsel and file a joint request for continuance accompanied by a declaration stating good cause for the continuance.
ORDER
San Marcos has not established the April 9, 2021 order granting Student’s motion to amend should be reconsidered. The motion for reconsideration is denied. All dates set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Cole Dalton Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings