Free Response to Cross Motion [Dispositive] - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 21.8 kB
Pages: 4
Date: February 12, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 748 Words, 7,666 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/3716/147-2.pdf

Download Response to Cross Motion [Dispositive] - District Court of Federal Claims ( 21.8 kB)


Preview Response to Cross Motion [Dispositive] - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:03-cv-00446-EGB

Document 147-2

Filed 02/12/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) LEROY BISHOP, et al.,

Case No. 03-446C Senior Judge Bruggink

REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF CRAIG CHALMERS'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND APPENDIX

ALAN BANOV Alan Banov & Associates 1819 L Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036-3830 (202) 822-9699 Fax: (202) 842-9331 [email protected] Attorney for Plaintiffs Of Counsel: WENDY BYNDLOSS Alan Banov & Associates 1819 L Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036-3830 February 12, 2007

i

Case 1:03-cv-00446-EGB

Document 147-2

Filed 02/12/2007

Page 2 of 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. The Court Should Not Apply Doe II to the Bureau of Prisons II. Plaintiff Chalmers Has Demonstrated FEPA Violations A. Plaintiff's Claims as Associate Warden at FCI-Otisville 1. Program Statements and Standards of Conduct Constitute Explicit Orders to Work Overtime BOP Training Materials Constitute Explicit Orders to Work Overtime Institution Supplements Constitute Explicit Orders to Work Overtime Position Descriptions Constitute Explicit Orders to Work Overtime Correctional Services Manuals Constitute Explicit Orders to Work Overtime 1 3 3

3 4 5 7

2. 3. 4. 5.

8

B. C. D. E. F. III.

Plaintiff Worked Overtime Preparing to Attend Meetings at the Start of His Shift 9 Plaintiff Incurred Overtime in Executive Close-out Meetings Plaintiff's Incurred Overtime as An Associate Warden at FDC Philadelphia Plaintiff's Incurred Overtime as Captain at MDC-Los Angeles Plaintiff Incurred Overtime as a Result of Government Travel Under 5 U.S.C. § 5543(a), Plaintiff's Chalmers's Overtime Was Not "Irregular or Occasional" Work 10 14 15 16

20 20 22

IV. Plaintiff's Overtime at Otisville Was Not De Minimus V. CONCLUSION

ii

Case 1:03-cv-00446-EGB

Document 147-2

Filed 02/12/2007

Page 3 of 4

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases ..........................................................................................................................................Page Abrahams v. United States, 1 Cl. Ct. 305 (1982) ......................................................................... 22 Aletta v. United States, 70 Fed. Cl. 600 (2006)............................................................................ 19 Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36 (1974) ................................................................. 5 Allstate Insurance Co. v. Swann, 27 F.3d 1539 (11th Cir. 1994).................................................. 12 Amos v. United States, 13 Cl. Ct. 442 (1987) .............................................................................. 20 Baylor v. United States, 198 Ct. Cl. 331 (1972) ........................................................................... 20 Bishop v. United States, 2006 U.S. Claims LEXIS 380, No. 03-446C (Nov. 20, 2006)................ 1 Bishop v. United States, 72 Fed. Cl. 766, 2006 U.S. Claims LEXIS 266 (Aug. 9, 2006).............. 1 Bobo v. United States, 136 F.2d 1465 (Fed. Cir. 1998) ............................................................... 22 Bobo v. United States, 37 Fed. Cl. 690 (1997) ............................................................................. 20 Bull v. United States ..................................................................................................................... 21 Byrnes v. United States, 163 Ct. Cl. 167, 330 F.2d 986 (1964) ..................................................... 8 Carlsen v. United States, 72 Fed. Cl. 782 (2006) ............................................................... 1, 6, 7, 8 Cobra Constr. Co. v. United States, 14 Cl. Ct. 523 (1988)........................................................... 21 Cooley v. Director of Revenue, State of Missouri, 896 S.W.2d 468 (Mo. App. 1995)................ 11 Cooley v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 1982 U.S. Cl. Ct. LEXIS 2501 (1982) ....................................... 8 Doe v. United States, 372 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2004) .......................................................... passim Graham v. United States, 3 Cl. Ct. 791 (1983) ............................................................................. 21 Greene v. Howard Univ., 134 U.S. App. D.C. 81, 412 F.2d 1128 (1969)...................................... 5 Honcho v. Ashcraft, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4901 (S.D. Ind. 2001).............................................. 7 IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, 546 U.S. 21, 126 S.Ct. 514 (2005).............................................................. 20 Int'l Bus. Invs., Inc. v. United States, 11 Cl. Ct. 588 (1987)........................................................ 21 Jinks-Umstead v. England, 2005 U.S. Dist LEXIS 34547 (D.D.C. 2005) ................................... 12 Lindow v. United States, 738 F.2d 1057 (9th Cir. 1984) ............................................................. 22 Post v. United States, 121 Ct. Cl. 94 (1951) ................................................................................... 3 R&R Associates, Inc. v. Visual Scene, Inc., 726 F.2d 36 (1st Cir. 1984) ..................................... 12 Riggs v. United States, 21 Cl. Ct. 664 (1990)......................................................................... 20, 21 United States v. Davis, 792 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir. 1986).................................................................. 13

iii

Case 1:03-cv-00446-EGB

Document 147-2

Filed 02/12/2007

Page 4 of 4

United States v. Finkielstain, 718 F. Supp. 1187 (S.D.N.Y. 1989) .............................................. 12 United States v. Marshall, 762 F.2d 419 (5th Cir. 1985)............................................................... 13 United States v. Wells, 262 F.3d 455 (5th Cir. 2001).................................................................... 12 Whelan Sec. Co. v. United States, 7 Cl. Ct. 496 (1985) ............................................................... 21 Statutes 5 U.S.C. § 5542........................................................................................................................... 1, 8 5 U.S.C. §5542(b)(2) .................................................................................................................... 18 5 U.S.C. §5542(b)(2)(A)............................................................................................................... 18 5 U.S.C. §5542(b)(2)(B) ............................................................................................................... 18 5 U.S.C. §5542(b)(2)(B)(iv) ......................................................................................................... 19 5 U.S.C. § 5543............................................................................................................................. 20 5 U.S.C. § 5543(a) ........................................................................................................................ 20

Rules and Regulations 5 C.F.R. § 550.111(c)...................................................................................................................... 1 5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (a)(1).............................................................................................................. 21 FED. R. OF EVID. 1004(3) .............................................................................................................. 13

Miscellaneous 31 Charles Alan Wright & Victor James Gold, Federal Practice & Procedure, §7184 (2000) .... 12

iv