California OAH special education order · March 3, 2025
Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2024120011 · ALJ Thanayi Lindsey
OAH denied Visalia's motion to reconsider the denial of a hearing continuance because its new facts did not explain why the case could not be mediated between March 25 and April 1, 2025.
Summary
After OAH denied a request to continue the due process hearing, Visalia asked OAH to reconsider, and Student filed a non-opposition. Visalia offered new facts about a short delay in getting Parent's signature and its attorney's unavailability to mediate before March 24, 2025. The ALJ found these facts did not address why mediation could not happen from March 25 to April 1, 2025, so they did not justify a continuance. The motion was denied and all dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
Even when the other side does not oppose, OAH will not grant a continuance or reconsideration unless the new facts fully explain why the existing schedule cannot work. Parties seeking more time should account for every available date before the hearing.
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:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
VISALIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024120011
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
MARCH 3, 2025
On February 27, 2025, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge, called the ALJ, issued an order denying the request for continuance of the due process hearing. On February 28, 2025, Visalia Unified School District, referred to as Visalia, filed a motion for reconsideration. Also, on February 28, 2025, Student filed a non-opposition to Visalia’s motion for reconsideration.
The Office of Administrative Hearings, called OAH, will generally reconsider a ruling upon a showing of new or different facts, circumstances, or law justifying reconsideration. The party must seek reconsideration within a reasonable period of time, generally within 10 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.)
Visalia’s new facts explained the short delay in obtaining Parent’s signature and their attorney’s unavailability to mediate the case before March 24, 2025. However, Visalia’s new facts do not address any inability to mediate the case from March 25, 2025, to April 1, 2025. Under these circumstances, Visalia’s facts did not justify a need to continue the due process hearing.
Visalia has not established the February 27, 2025, order should be reconsidered.
The motion for reconsideration is denied. All dates set in this matter are confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Thanayi Lindsey Thanayi Lindsey Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings