Watson v. Transdev Alternative Services, Inc.

Background

Amanda Watson sued Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. The opinion states that Watson’s original and proposed amended complaints alleged that Hassinger was Watson’s primary harasser and engaged in outrageous conduct toward her, including allegedly listening to Watson in a bathroom against her wishes. The case was in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction.

Motion to Amend and Joinder

Watson moved for leave to amend the complaint to add Hassinger as a defendant. Adding a party who would destroy diversity jurisdiction is called joinder of a nondiverse party. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e), the district court had discretion to allow or deny that joinder.

The court found Hassinger’s central role in the alleged events especially important. Because Hassinger’s involvement had been clear from the beginning of the case, the court found limited prejudice to Transdev from allowing Hassinger to be named as a defendant at that stage. The court said the privacy allegations, although “somewhat incredible,” contained specific factual matter. It rejected Transdev’s arguments that the alleged bathroom conduct was not harmful or highly offensive, or that Watson had consented through the company’s “Email, Internet, General Computer Usage Policy.” The court also held that the imprecision of the claims did not make amendment futile.

Ruling

Judge Vince Chhabria granted the motion for leave to amend. The court adopted the proposed First Amended Complaint as the operative complaint. Because Hassinger was a nondiverse defendant whose joinder destroyed diversity jurisdiction, the court remanded the case to San Francisco Superior Court. The opinion did not decide the ultimate merits of Watson’s claims.