Letner v. City of Oliver Springs

Decision Date04 March 2008
Docket NumberNo. 3:06-CV-443.,3:06-CV-443.
Citation545 F.Supp.2d 717
PartiesDewayne LETNER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF OLIVER SPRINGS, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee

Adrienne L. Anderson, Kramer, Rayson, Leake, Rodgers & Morgan, LLP, Knoxville, TN, for Plaintiff.

James M. Webster, Law Office of James M. Webster, Oak Ridge, TN, for Defendant.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

THOMAS W. PHILLIPS, District Judge.

this is an action brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by plaintiff, Dewayne Letner, for compensation for offduty care and training of his police dog while he was employed as a canine officer by the City of Oliver Springs. The court tried this civil action without a jury commencing on August 23, 2007. Following the trial, the plaintiff filed proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Defendant failed to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law despite being provided an opportunity to do so. Having heard the testimony at trial, having reviewed the exhibits introduced into evidence, and having considered the plaintiffs proposed findings and conclusions, the following are the court's findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a).

Findings of Fact

1. Dewayne Letner worked as a police officer for the City of Oliver Springs from May 2003 through October 2006.

2. The duties of Officer Letner involved the use of a narcotics detection dog from November 2003 through October 2006.

3. The narcotics detection dog lived with Officer Letner.

4. The City of Oliver Springs did not pay Officer Letner additional wages for off-duty care of his police dog during the period from November 2003 through October 2006.

5. The City did pay Officer Letner for his full shift of work and for any overtime indicated on the time sheets prepared by Officer Letner.

6. During the period from November 2003 through October 2006, the City of Oliver Springs established a work schedule for its police officers of 160 hours in a 28-day work period, for an average work week of 40 hours per week.

7. Officer Letner was usually scheduled to work on-duty 76 hours in one 2-week period, following by 84 hours in the second 2-week period.

8. During the period from November 1, 2003 through January 31, 2005, Officer Letner's regular rate of pay was $12.71 per hour. His overtime rate of pay was $19.07 per hour.

9. During the period from February 1, 2005 through May 22, 2005, Officer Letner's regular rate of pay was $12.96 per hour. His overtime rate of pay was $19.44 per hour.

10. During the period from May 23, 2005 through July 2, 2006, Officer Letner's regular rate of pay was $13.35 per hour. His overtime rate of pay was $20.02 per hour.

11. During the period from July 3, 2006 through October 22, 2006, Officer Letner's regular rate of pay was $13.90 per hour. His overtime rate of pay was $20.85 per hour.

12. Prior to Officer Letner's employment with the City of Oliver Springs, the City employed Floyd Long and Dwayne Bales as canine officers.

13. For the period of time prior to July 2001, the City of Oliver Springs did not compensate Officers Bales and Long for their off-duty care and training of their narcotics detection dogs.

14. Officers Bales and Long sued the City of Oliver Springs for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act to obtain compensation for the off-duty care and training of their narcotics detection dogs.

15. For the period from approximately July 2001 through 2002, the City of Oliver Springs compensated Officers Bales and Long for their off-duty care and training of their narcotics detection dogs by giving those officers time off with pay equal to one hour per day, seven days per week.

16. The City compensated Officers Dwayne Bales and Floyd Long for their off-duty care of the police dogs by paying these officers for 33 hours of reported on-duty work per week, and paying them for seven hours per week for "K-9 care and maintenance."

17. Police Chief Kenneth Morgan is the City representative who made the decision to provide that compensation to Officers Bales and Long.

18. On August 20, 2003, a judgment was entered in favor of Dwayne Bales and Floyd Long and against the City of Oliver Springs for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

19. This judgment was entered approximately three months before the City of Oliver Springs began using Officer Letner's dog, Prynia, as a narcotics detection dog for the City of Oliver Springs Police Department.

20. The City of Oliver Springs stopped using the narcotics detection dogs of Officers Bales and Long before Officer Letner began working for the City.

21. Beginning in November 2003, Officer Letner's job duties as a police officer for the City of Oliver Springs included the daily training, care and handling of Prynia, the narcotics detection dog he owned.

22. Officer Letner reported to work for each shift with Prynia and spent his entire shift working with Prynia.

23. At the end of each shift, Officer Letner returned home with Prynia, and Prynia lived at Officer Letner's house.

24. Officer Letner spent time outside of his normally scheduled shift in connection with the care of Prynia, including the feeding, watering, grooming, bathing, exercising, cleaning up after, transporting, training and "bonding" with Prynia.

25. Officer Letner testified that he spent an average of one (1) hour per day, seven days per week, in these activities.

26. Prynia was responsible for at least fifty arrests by the City of Oliver Springs Police Department.

27. Several months after the City of Oliver Springs began using Officer Letner's dog Prynia as a narcotics detection dog, the City also began using Smokey, another narcotics detection dog, for whom Officer Bradley Aytes was the canine handler.

28. Police Chief Kenneth Morgan was the City representative who decided how compensation for the off-duty care and maintenance of the narcotics detection dogs of Officers Letner and Aytes would be handled.

29. There was a discussion between Officer Letner, Officer Aytes, and Chief Morgan in the summer of 2004, about the time that Officer Aytes became the canine officer handling Smokey, regarding whether the City would compensate Officer Letner and Officer Aytes for their off-duty care and training of their narcotics detection dogs.

30. Officer Letner and Officer Aytes asked Chief Morgan if they could be compensated for the off-duty care of the dogs, and they specifically suggested that such compensation could start by allowing them to take paid time off during the four-hour shift that they were scheduled to work at least once a month.

31. Chief Morgan told them that the canine officers could not have any kind of "comp time," because if the City Council found out about it, the City Council would do away with the dogs.

32. Officer Letner understood from this conversation with Chief Morgan that the City would not compensate him for the off-duty care and training of his dog.

33. Officer Letner had no other discussions with Chief Morgan about receiving compensation for the off-duty care and training of Prynia.

34. Officer Letner never took paid time off as compensation for the off-duty care and training of Prynia.

35. There is no evidence that Officer Letner received any paid time off as compensation for the off-duty care of Prynia.

36. Officer Letner's time clock records show that Officer Letner clocked in, worked a twelve-hour shift, and then clocked out at the end of the twelve hours.

37. No records were produced by the City of Oliver Springs reflecting any compensation, whether in paid time off or money given to Officer Letner for his off-duty care and training of his narcotics detection dog.

38. The 2001-2002 time clock records for Officer Floyd Long show a notation of seven hours for each one week period and fourteen hours for each two-week period for "K-9 C & M" (canine care and maintenance). The same "K-9 C & M" notation appears on the 2001-2002 time clock records for Officer Dwayne Bales. Chief Morgan wrote the "K-9 C & M" notation and the hours of such compensation on each time card and signed each time card for former canine officers Bales and Long. Although Chief Morgan also signed each of Officer Letner's time cards, he never made any notation of any time off or compensation for canine care and maintenance on Officer Letner's time cards.

39. In each pay period, Officer Letner's hours reported on his time records equaled or exceeded the 76 or 84 hours he was regularly scheduled to work in a two-week period. Accordingly, the court finds that all wages for off-duty dog care are owed to Officer Letner at his overtime rates of pay.

40. Officer Letner's time records show that the Police Department approved Officer Letner's requests for overtime pay for hours that were in excess of his 76 or 84 scheduled work hours.

41. Based on the evidence presented, it appears that the parties are in agreement that compensation of one hour per day, seven days a week, is a reasonable amount of compensation for the off-duty care and handling of narcotics detection dogs by the City of Oliver Spring's canine officers.

42. Attachment "A" to plaintiffs Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law shows that there were 444 hours of off-duty dog care from the pay period ending November 23, 2003 through the pay period ending January 30, 2005. At Officer Letner's overtime rate of $19.07 per hour at that time, the total owed for that period is $8,467.08.

43. Attachment "A" shows that there were 112 hours of off-duty dog care from the pay period ending February 13, 2005 through the pay period ending May 22, 2005. At Officer Letner's overtime rate of $19.44 per hour at that time, the total owed for that period is $2,177.28.

44. Attachment "A" shows that there were 406 hours of off-duty dog care from the pay period ending June 5, 2006 through the pay period ending July 2, 2006....

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Campbell v. Kelly
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Ohio
    • August 31, 2011
    ...Additionally, a failure to request overtime at the time the work is performed does not result in waiver. Letner v. City of Oliver Springs, 545 F. Supp.2d 717, 724 (E.D. Tenn. 2008) (citations omitted). Defendants' third point regarding the grievance procedure is also unpersuasive. Defendant......
  • Pagán-Porratta v. Municipality of Guaynabo
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Puerto Rico
    • August 27, 2019
    ...681 (8th Cir. 1996); Martinez v. Hernando Cty. Sheriff's Office, 2013 WL 12123320, at *2 (M.D. Fla. 2013), Letner v. City of Oliver Springs, 545 F. Supp. 2d 717, 723 (E.D. Tenn. 2008); Levering v. District of Columbia, 869 F.Supp. 24, 27 (D.D.C. 1994). The main issue here is therefore not w......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT