$13.1 Million Verdict for Two Male LAPD Police Officers in Sex Discrimination and Retaliation Case – LA Times Covers Lawsuit

As reported by Los Angeles Times, following a one-week trial, McNicholas & McNicholas secured a $13.1 million verdict on behalf of LAPD Officers Stephen Glick and Alfred Garcia against the City of Los Angeles, finding that they had been discriminated and retaliated against on the basis of their sex.

In an interview with Los Angeles Times, Matthew McNicholas, lead attorney for the police officers, said: “All of the evidence pointed to gender discrimination, from focusing on the males to the exclusion of the females.”

Read more about the lawsuit below.

In January 2017, Glick and Garcia and their two female partners responded to a DUI traffic collision. Glick’s body-worn video recorded his entire contact with the suspect Chavez, except for 12 minutes at Newton Station when Glick was with his female partners the entire time. After being booked, Chavez needed medical attention and was transported by ambulance to the hospital. No officers accompanied Chavez in the ambulance as required per Department policy. Neither Glick, nor Garcia, nor their two female partners were assigned to escort the suspect to the hospital, two separate officers were given the assignment.

Two days later, Chavez filed a complaint with the LAPD alleging his eyebrows and mustache had been shaved, and a penis drawn on his abdomen. The Department immediately began to investigate.

However, the Department immediately focused on Glick and Garcia, even though they were not partners. The Department did not look at their female partners. The males were almost immediately benched and then, despite the 10-month investigation finding that it could not determine who did the act, the Chief of Police ordered Glick and Garcia only to a Board of Rights for termination. It was discovered by undisputed testimony that the reasons Glick and Garcia were the focus the entire time is “because this is what boys do, not girls.” This is what is what a Deputy Chief told an internal representative during the saga. Ultimately, that internal representative was able to get the Board of Rights stopped, but the plaintiffs lost career advancement and have had their careers forever tarnished.

Read the original complaint here.