California OAH special education order · August 11, 2025
Order Granting Request for Reconsideration and Continuance and Setting Prehearing Conference and Hearing
OAH Case No. 2025070706 · ALJ Rita Defilippis
OAH granted Student's reconsideration request and moved the hearing because Student's counsel had a newly set conflict with an earlier-filed case, and earlier-filed cases go first.
This case went to decision
Student v. Ojai Unified School District (consolidated): Ojai Unified wins every issue over a student's home hospital program and may reassess her without parental consent. (2025)
Summary
OAH had already continued this Ojai-filed case to August 26–28, 2025. Student then asked for reconsideration because another earlier-filed case handled by Student's counsel had been set for those same dates. Ojai opposed, arguing the conflict was foreseeable and avoidable. The ALJ found the new facts justified reconsideration and rejected Ojai's argument, explaining that earlier-filed cases proceed first when hearing dates conflict. The ALJ did not use Student's requested date of September 16, 2025, because Student gave no good cause for it, and instead set the hearing for September 3 and 4, 2025.
Why it matters
When an attorney's calendar conflict comes from a case filed earlier, OAH will generally move the later case even over the district's objection. A party still must show good cause for the specific new date it asks for.
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:
OJAI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
v.
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2025070706
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
AND CONTINUANCE AND SETTING PREHEARING
CONFERENCE AND HEARING
AUGUST 11, 2025
On August 1, 2025, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an order granting Student’s request for continuance due to the unavailability of Student’s counsel due his representation in a matter filed before this matter and scheduled for hearing on the same dates. That order set hearing on August 26, 27, and 28, 2025.
On August 7, 2025, Student filed a motion for reconsideration based on new information of another previously filed case for which Student’s counsel is representing at due process, which is scheduled for hearing on August 26, 27, and 28, 2025, making Student’s counsel unavailable on the currently set dates for hearing in this matter.
On August 11, 2025, Ojai Unified School District opposed Student’s request for reconsideration claiming that Student’s asserted conflict was foreseeable and avoidable.
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
Student offers new facts to support reconsideration. Since the undersigned ALJ’s August 1, 2025, order, another earlier filed case was set for hearing on the same dates as those set for hearing in this matter. The motion for reconsideration is granted.
ORDER
On reconsideration, Student’s request for continuance is granted based on Student’s showing of Student’s counsel’s unavailability on the dates set in the undersigned ALJ’s August 1, 2025, order due to his representation in a previously filed matter on the same dates. Earlier filed cases proceed to hearing before later filed cases when hearing dates conflict. However, Student did not provide any good cause for Student’s request to continue this matter to September 16, 2025.
Ojai’s argument that the conflict was foreseeable and avoidable are rejected as unpersuasive. Additionally, even if it was, a hearing date conflict between this matter and a previously filed case, remains.
Accordingly, all previous dates are vacated. The new dates are:
PREHEARING CONFERENCE will be held on August 25, 2025, at 3:00 PM.
DUE PROCESS HEARING will be held on September 3 and 4, 2025.
The mediation, prehearing conference, and due process hearing will be held by videoconference or telephone, unless otherwise ordered. The due process hearing will begin at 9:30 AM on all days, and generally end at 3:30 PM, unless otherwise ordered.
The hearing will continue day to day, as needed, Mondays and Fridays included, at the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. Prehearing conference statements and motions are due to OAH no later than three business days before the prehearing conference. Late motions will only be considered if good cause is established for the late filing.
The parties must immediately give potential witnesses the hearing dates, and must subpoena witnesses, if necessary, so they are available to testify. Failing to properly notify or subpoena a witness is not good cause to delay the hearing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Rita Defilippis Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings