In 2011, the City of Ruston Police Chief Stephen Rogers (“Rogers”) hired Kayla Loyd (“Loyd”) as dispatcher and, in 2013, Rogers promoted Loyd to a Police Officer.  Afterwards, between 2013 and April 2020, Rogers named Loyd as the Ruston Police Department’s (the “RPD”) Hostage Negotiator, member of RPD SWAT Team, RPD Defensive Tactics Instructor, RPD Field Training Officer; and RPD Voice Analyst.  In April 2020, Rogers promoted Loyd to the rank of Sgt.  In December 2020, Loyd applied to Rogers to be assigned to the RPD Criminal Investigation Division (the “CID”).  Chief Rogers did not assign Loyd to the CID but assigned a Caucasian male police officer, respectively, instead. Subsequently, on May 19, 2021, Loyd filed a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC claiming disparate treatment, hostile work-environment, retaliation, and gender discrimination for not being assigned by Rogers to the CID.  After receiving a Right-to Sue Letter from the EEOC on August 4, 2022, and then filed suit in federal court on October 26, 2022.  Loyd sued the City of Ruston, Chief Rogers, and Deputy Chief Henry Wood (collectively, the “Defendants”) in federal court alleging the same causes of action named in her EEOC Charge of Discrimination.

Thereafter, on February 9, 2023, the Gold Weems Employment Discrimination Team of Steven M. Oxenhandler, Joshua J. Dara, Jr., Michael J. O’Shee, and Jessica Poole filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (“MSJ”) on behalf of the Defendants.  On July 26, 2023, the District Court granted in-part and denied in-part the Defendants MSJ.  Specifically, the Court dismissed Loyd’s claims of disparate treatment, hostile work-environment, and retaliation, with prejudice, but denied the Defendants MSJ regarding gender discrimination (see attached Memorandum Ruling).  Significantly, in Louisiana, because police officer promotions to a higher rank are based on seniority and test scores only, not merit, a Chief of Police has no discretion to deny a promotion to a higher rank.  A Chief of Police, like Rogers, however, does have the discretion for internal assignments to various divisions and positions, such as an assignment to the CID, SWAT Team, etc.  

This matter, then, went to trial in Monroe between October 7, 2024, and October 10, 2024.  To prove an adverse employment action based on her gender, Loyd had to prove that an assignment by Rogers to CID is objectively better than being a police officer on road patrol, like Loyd; that is, an assignment to CID is the functional equivalent to a promotion.  The jury consisted on five (5) women and two (2) men.  After a week-long trial, the jury returned a jury verdict in favor of the City of Monroe holding an assignment to CID is not objectively better than being a road patrol officer and, therefore, not an adverse employment action.  Thus, the jury found no gender discrimination against Loyd.

Loyd then appealed the jury’s verdict to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and. Loyd asked for oral argument before the Fifth Circuit.  Despite Loyd’s request for oral argument, on August 15, 2025, the Fifth Circuit issued a written ruling affirming the jury verdict. (See attached Fifth Circuit opinion).  This win is crucial because it preserves the ability of all Chiefs of Police to make internal assignments without having to worry about the assignment being a promotion or having to defend a lawsuit claiming discrimination.