California OAH special education order · April 8, 2022
Order Granting Reconsideration, Vacating Order Granting Continuance, and Reinstating Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing Dates
OAH Case No. 2022030182 · ALJ Kara Hatfield
OAH granted Student's reconsideration motion and vacated a continuance because Student's attorney never received notice of Pajaro Valley's continuance motion and had no chance to respond.
Summary
OAH had granted Pajaro Valley's request to continue the due process hearing. Student moved for reconsideration the next day, showing that Student's attorney never received notice of the continuance motion. Pajaro Valley admitted the notice problem but asked OAH to keep the continuance in place. OAH granted reconsideration, vacated the continuance, reinstated the April 11, 2022 prehearing conference and all prior dates, and set the continuance motion to be heard at that conference, with Student allowed to file a further response by 10:00 AM that day.
Why it matters
If a district gets a continuance without properly serving the parent's side, the family can quickly seek reconsideration and have the order set aside so they can be heard on whether good cause exists. Fast action matters: here OAH ruled the same day, before the district even responded.
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.
PAJARO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2022030182
ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION,
VACATING ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE, AND
REINSTATING PREHEARING CONFERENCE AND
DUE PROCESS HEARING DATES
APRIL 8, 2022
On April 7, 2022, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an order granting Pajaro Valley Unified School District’s request for a continuance of the due process hearing. On April 8, 2022, Student filed a motion for reconsideration. Due to the need to promptly reinstate the prehearing conference previously scheduled for Monday April 11, 2022, this Order is being issued before Pajaro Valley has an opportunity to respond to Student’s motion for reconsideration. On April 7, 2022, Pajaro Valley notified the Office of Administrative Hearings, called OAH, it had become aware Student’s attorney did not receive notice of its motion to continue, but requested OAH not vacate the Order granting the motion.
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
Student sufficiently proved his attorney did not receive notice of Pajaro Valley’s motion to continue and therefore was not afforded the opportunity to provide OAH information relevant to determining whether there was good cause for a continuance.
The motion for reconsideration is granted.
ORDER
On reconsideration, the order granting a continuance is vacated and the prehearing conference previously scheduled for Monday April 11, 2022, at 1:00 PM is reinstated. Pajaro Valley’s motion to continue shall be heard during the prehearing conference. If Student wishes to submit additional documents or argument in response to Pajaro Valley’s motion, Student must file a further response by 10:00 AM on Monday, April 11, 2022. All dates previously set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Kara Hatfield Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings