City of Owasso v. Fraternal Order Police
Citation | 336 P.3d 1023,2014 OK CIV APP 75 |
Decision Date | 15 April 2014 |
Docket Number | Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 1. ,111,441. |
Parties | The CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, a municipal corporation, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, LODGE # 149, and Mike Denton, Defendants/Appellants. |
Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma |
James Patrick Hunt, Tulsa, Oklahoma, for Appellants.
Tony Puckett, Elizabeth Bowersox, McAfee & Taft, A Professional Corporation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for Appellee.
¶ 1 Defendants/Appellants Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge # 149, and Mike Denton (respectively, Lodge and Denton, or collectively, Defendants), seek review of an order of the trial court vacating a decision of an arbitrator as contrary to public policy. In this appeal, Defendants complain the parties' collective bargaining agreement expressly proscribes district court review of an arbitrator's decision, and the trial court erred as a matter of both fact and law in holding the arbitrator's decision violated public policy.
¶ 2 Defendant Mike Denton worked for the Police Department of the Plaintiff City of Owasso pursuant to the terms of a collective bargaining agreement (CBA), and was a member of Defendant Fraternal Order of Police Lodge # 149. A seventeen-year employee of the police department, Denton was terminated from the employment on the allegation of his use of excessive force on an arrestee in custody. Defendants filed a grievance to challenge Denton's termination as without just cause as required by the CBA.
¶ 3 The matter proceeded to a hearing before an arbitrator chosen by the parties. At the hearing, video evidence showed that Denton stepped on the arrestee's head, and struck an arrestee in the face with his elbow or back of his arm three times. Denton averred he struck the arrestee because he believed the arrestee was going to spit on him. City characterized the blows as “elbow strikes,” while at least one of three defensive tactics instructors referred to the blows as “more of a poke than a strike.” The evidence showed Denton struck the arrestee on the left side of his face, and although the booking photograph of the arrestee showed some injuries to the right side of the arrestee's face, the photo showed no injury to the left side of the arrestee's face.
¶ 4 On consideration of the testimony and evidence, the arbitrator held that, although “the force Denton used to restrain [the arrestee] was unreasonable and unnecessary,” and “[h]ad evidence of injury to [the arrestee] been established, this incident may well have fallen into the excessive force category[,] no such evidence was presented,” and “[a]bsent evidence of any injury, ... Denton's conduct in this instance does not rise to the level of excessive force as that term is defined in case law.” Considering Denton's commendable work history, lack of prior discipline for use of force, and the department's past “tolerance in meting out discipline when it comes to officer misconduct,” “the arbitrator [found] that a written reprimand ... is the appropriate level of discipline.” The arbitrator consequently set aside Denton's termination.
¶ 5 Plaintiff City then filed its petition to vacate the arbitrator's award in the trial court.1 City asserted the arbitrator exceeded the authority granted under the collective bargaining agreement, and the arbitrator's decision to reinstate a police officer, determined to have used unreasonable force on an arrestee, violated Oklahoma public policy. Defendants objected, argued the collective bargaining agreement expressly proscribed review of the arbitrator's decision “in any court or ... appeal forum,” and asserted a counter-claim for enforcement of the arbitrator's decision.
¶ 6 Defendants then filed a motion for summary judgment. Defendants again asserted the CBA expressly proscribed judicial review of an arbitrator's decision,2 and that, under the CBA, “[w]ith respect to the interpretation, enforcement or application of the provisions of [the CBA], the decision, findings, and recommendations of the arbitrator [were] final and binding on the parties.” Defendants argued the arbitrator's decision to reinstate and reprimand was entirely consistent with the level of discipline previously imposed by the police department in similar cases and implicated no violation of public policy.
¶ 7 City responded, and also asserted a motion for summary judgment. City argued that police department policy permitted the use of only such force as “reasonable and necessary under the circumstances,” specifically defined “excessive force” as “exceed[ing] the degree permitted by law or the policies of” the department, and presumed “the use of excessive force ... when a peace officer continues to apply physical force in excess of the force permitted by law or said policies ... to a person who has been rendered incapable of resisting arrest.” City pointed out that the arbitrator expressly concluded that Denton applied “unreasonable and unnecessary force” to the handcuffed arrestee, and expressly conceded “Denton's use of unreasonable and unnecessary force [was] an appropriate matter for discipline.” City asserted the CBA did not condition termination of the employment upon a finding of “excessive force,” and Denton's use of unreasonable and unnecessary force constituted just cause for the termination of his employment under the CBA.
¶ 8 On consideration of the parties' submissions and argument, the trial court held:
Defendants appeal, and again assert (1) the CBA expressly proscribes judicial review of the arbitrator's decision and (2) the trial court erred in setting aside the arbitrator's decision on public policy grounds.
¶ 9 The courts afford great deference to a decision of an arbitrator:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Owasso, Okla., Corp. v. Fraternal Order Police
...336 P.3d 1023The CITY OF OWASSO, OKLAHOMA, a municipal corporation, Plaintiff/Appellee,v.FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, LODGE # 149, and Mike Denton, Defendants/Appellants.No. 111,441.Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 1.Court of Civil Appe......
-
Bruning v. City of Guthrie, CIV-15-0003-HE
...Oklahoma courts in actions seeking judicial enforcement and review ofarbitrators' awards. E.g., City of Owasso v. Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 149, 336 P.3d 1023 (Okla. Civ. App. 2014); City of Perkins, 146 P.3d at 830. In the absence of a statutory or contractual bar, the court can......