HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-91-0523E
V
J-91-480
6/21/91
RESOLUTION NO.
91 -)23
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF
FINANCE TO PAY TWENTY-FOUR POLICE OFFICERS IN
THE K-9 UNIT OF THE MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT,
WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM
OF $500,292.05, PLUS INTEREST, IN FULL AND
COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI RELATING TO
THEIR ENTITLEMENT TO OVERTIME COMPENSATION
PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. 201, ET SEQ., IN U.S.
DISTRICT COURT CASE NO. 90-1152-CIV-SPELLMAN,
UPON THE EXECUTION OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
AND UPON APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT BY THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT RELEASING THE
CITY OF MIAMI FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS FOR PAST LIABILITY; FURTHER PROVIDING
A SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS FOR SAID SETTLEMENT
AMOUNT, PLUS ATTORNEY'S FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF
$20,000.00, WITH FUNDS THEREFOR ALLOCATED
FROM RISK MANAGEMENT POLICE TORT LIABILITY
ACCOUNT NO. 270401-652.
WHEREAS, William Martin, Fred Morris, Jr., Connie Ibrahim,
Gordon A. Wing, Jack Price, Timothy Fell, Aubrey Johnson, Joseph
J. Potoehl, Diane L. Dehay, Luis L. Franco, Robert Myers, Miguel
Rodriguez, Frank A. Sallano, Orestes Guas, James M. Copeland,
Robert W. Reed, Laurence DeMatteis, Raul Anaya, William G.
Jaeger, Randy Hicks, Michael Marquez, John K. Scanlon, Gail C.
Veach and Timothy Young, through their attorney, filed a lawsuit
against the City of Miami, in the United States District Court of
Dade County, Florida, Case No. 90-1152-CIV-SPELLMAN, pursuant to
the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. Section 201, et seq.,
Miami, Dade County, Florida, for overtime compensation for the
proper care, grooming, feeding and exercising of their K-9 dogs,
for keeping the yard clean, cleaning the dog's space in the
police vehicle, and for like responsibilities performed on a
daily basis, including holidays, vacations and other days on
which the employee was not required to work; and
WHEREAS, it is advantageous for the City of Miami to effect
a settlement of this lawsuit; and
WHEREAS, the above claim and lawsuit has been investigated
by the City Attorney's Office and the City Attorney's Office and
the City Manager recommend that all olaim(s) be settled for a
x' `.....
I rn=_AM_
BY G ,
CITY COMUSSION
buxTa-za• OF
JUL 11 ""
91- 52
(l�
total sum of $800,292.08, plus interest on the unpaid balance, to
be paid as follows: 1) the sum due each K-9 offioer shall be
divided by two; 2) the resulting sum shall be paid in three
installments, the first installment shall have a cap of
$79,300.00 which will be divided equally among all Plaintiffs, -
the second installment representing one-half of the total sum
shall be paid on or before October 25, 1991; the third and final
installment shall be paid on or before January 28, 1992 but in no
event shall such sum be paid prior to January 1, 1992;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The recitals and findings set forth in the
Preamble to this Resolution are hereby adopted by reference
thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this
Section.
Section 2. The Director of Finance is hereby authorized to
pay William Martin, Fred Morris, Jr., Connie Ibrahim, Gordon A.
Wing, Jack Price, Timothy Fell, Aubrey Johnson, Joseph J.
Potoehl, Diane L. Dehay, Luis L. Franco, Robert Myers, Miguel
Rodriguez, Frank A. Sallano, Orestes Guas, James M. Copeland,
Robert W. Reed, Laurence DeMatteis, Raul Anaya, William G.
Jaeger, Randy Hicks, Michael Marquez, John K. Scanlon, Gail C.
Veach and Timothy Young, without the admission of liability, the
total sum of $500,292.05, plus interest of eight percent (8%) as
provided herein in full and complete settlement of any and all
claims and demands against the City of Miami for past liability,
and attorney's fees and costs to the law firm of Atkinson, Jenne,
Diner, Stone, Cohen & Klausner, P.A. in the sum of $20,000.00, in
U.S. District Court Case No. 90-1152-CIV-SPELLMAN, upon the
execution of a Settlement Agreement, releasing the City of Miami
from all claims and demands, said payment to be made upon the
United States District Court's approval of the settlement with
funds therefor hereby allocated from Risk Management Police Tort
Liability Account No. 270401-652.
-2-
91- 523
�i144111.4 ®14�AH4A114�!•T .:-,. •NAP
i7
i
i
Seotion 3. This Resolution shall beoome effeotive
immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this Ilth day of 1 1991.
t
CITY CLERK
BUDGETARY REVIEW:
MANOHAR S. SURANCL D CTOR
DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET
SELF -IN
SUJAN S.
SELF-INA
TRUST Ft
PREPARED AND A
RAMON IRI
ASSISTANT
TRUST FUND REVIEW:
A
AND NSURANCE
PROVED BY:
/9
ATTORNEY
TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
JOdGE L . E ANDEZ
CI Y ATTORN Y
M2233/RI/bf
XAVIER L, OUAREZ,
_3-
91-- 523
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Commission
FROM47� a I;'.-ernandez
Ci y Atto ney
DATE June 28, 1991 FILd-91-480
SUBJECT William Martin, et al.
vs. City of Miami
U.S. District Court
REFERENCES. Case No. 90-1152-CIV-SPELLMAN
ENCLOSURES ( 2 )
This memorandum supplements the attached backup memorandum
of June 3, 1991 on this subject which had been timely submitted
for your consideration at the June 20th Commission Meeting but
did not appear on that Agenda due to the Agenda volume.
In our cover memorandum transmitting the attached proposed
settlement Resolution, the discussion of payment of attorney's
fees was inadvertently omitted. 29 U.S.C. 216(b) provides that a
I Court shall "in addition to any judgment awarded to the plaintiff
or plaintiffs, allow a reasonable attorney's fee to be paid by
the defendant ." The fee of Twenty Thousand Dollars
($20,000) on a settlement of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
($500,000) would be more than reasonable. The hours spent on
discovery, deposition and preparation for trial render the
$20,000 attorney's fee most reasonable. This matter was
► scheduled for trial during the week of June 6, 1991 and the
parties had to prepare an extensive and time consuming pre-trial
stipulation. Additionally, there were extensive negotiations
that resulted in the proposed settlement being recommended to the
City Commission.
JLF:RI:bf:gmb:M088
I}
k
i
i
91- 523
91- 523
i
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members DATE.
of the City Commission
SUBJECT
1
FROM J ge Fernandez REFERENCES
City At rney
ENCLOSURES
June 3, 1991 F'LV-91-480
William Martin, et al.
vs. City of Miami
U.S. District Court
Case No. 90-1152-CSV-SPELLMAI
The police officers in the Canine Unit filed suit in federal
court claiming overtime compensation for proper care, grooming,
feeding and exercising of City -owned K-9 dogs, for keeping the
yard clean, cleaning the dogs' space in the police vehicles, and
for like responsibilities performed on a daily basis including
holidays, vacations and other days on which the police officers
were not required to work. Prior to the Supreme Court's reversal
of National League of Cities v . Us= (1976) , 426 U.S. 833, 49
L.Ed.2d 245, 98 S.Ct. 2465 in the Garcia v. San Antonio
Metropolitan Transit Authority (1965), 3 L.Ed. 1016, the
provisions of 29 U.S. 201, et seq., were not applicable to
municipalities. Congress in 1986 amended 29 U.S. 201 to make the
statute applicable to municipalities.
t Under the statute, case law and regulations, implementing
overtime provisions became automatic once the employer has
knowledge that an employee is working overtime, even if_ the
employee volunteered to do the work. The Police Department's SOP
provided and required the police officers to engage in the
activities claimed to constitute the overtime beyond the
officers' normal work day. The issue to be tried would be on the
actual amount of time spent by the officers in the care of the
dogs. The proposed settlement is in line with the amount of time
settled by other municipalities on this issue of the K-9s. .-The
total settlement for all twenty-four officers is $500,292.05 plus
interest on the unpaid balance. Payment will be made in three
installments. The entire sum will be divided by two. The first
installment will have a cap of $79,300.00 and is payable upon the
Court's approval of the settlement. The remaining balance of the
first one-half would be payable on or before October 25, 1991 and
the third and final installment on or before January 28, 1992 but
in no event prior to January 1, 1992.
Therefore, it is respectfully requested and recommended by
the City Manager and myself that this Resolution be approved.
91-- 523