United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
DECISION AND ORDER
WILLIAM E. DUFFIN U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Goodwin, proceeding pro se, filed two complaints on October
11, 2017, relating to the termination of his employment by
U.S. Foods, Inc. The first action, 17-CV-1377, named
Teamsters General Local Union 200 (“the Union”)
as the defendant. The second, 17-CV-1378, named U.S. Foods as
December 8, 2017, Goodwin filed identical amended complaints
in both actions. Each amended complaint named both the Union
and U.S. Foods as defendants. Both amended complaints also
added Richard Meldman, Nicole Griesbach, Thomas Perszyk, and
Aaron Kraemer (all employees of U.S. Foods) and Jeff Bandur
(a Union official) as defendants.
days later, Goodwin again amended his complaints. The second
amended complaint in 17-CV-1377 named only the Union in the
caption as a defendant. But in the body of that second
amended complaint, under the heading “Parties, ”
Goodwin named as defendants the same individuals and entities
named in his first amended complaints.
the second amended complaint in 17-CV-1378, Goodwin named
U.S. Foods, Meldman, Griesbach, Perszyk, and Kraemer as
defendants. He also named Bandur of the Union as a defendant,
although he omitted the Union itself as a defendant.
court consolidated the actions for all pretrial proceedings.
(ECF No. 17.)However, these remain two distinct actions.
court understands Goodwin's allegations, his claim
against the Union and Bandur (collectively, “the Union
defendants”) rests upon his belief that the Union
representative, Bandur, did not properly represent him with
respect to U.S. Foods' termination of his employment.
This claim is distinct from the claims he asserts against
U.S. Foods and its employees (collectively, the “the
U.S. Foods defendants”). As a result, joinder of these
claims in one lawsuit is not proper under Rule 20(a)(2).
Accordingly, to the extent that Goodwin actually intended to
pursue claims against both the Union defendants and the U.S.
Foods defendants in a single action, in accord with Rule 21
the court drops the U.S. Foods defendants from the second
amended complaint in 17-CV-1377 and drops the Union
defendants from the second amended complaint in 17-CV-1378.
Bandur is a defendant only in case number 17-CV-1377.
January 15, 2018, the U.S. Foods defendants filed a motion to
dismiss the second amended complaint as to each of them. (ECF
to details contained in his second amended complaint and
documents appended to that complaint,  Goodwin began
working for U.S. Foods as a delivery driver in May 2014. (ECF
No. 15 at 5.) In November 2014 U.S. Foods received a
complaint from one of its hotel customers that alleged that
one of its delivery drivers made several of the female
employees of the hotel uncomfortable by “staring and
leering at them, making suggestive and inappropriate comments
(such as asking their ages and telling them they're
pretty), and making animal noises.” (ECF No. 15-1 at
1.) U.S. Foods concluded that Goodwin was the driver and
advised him as to proper professional behavior. (ECF No. 15-1
at 16.) Goodwin denied engaging in the complained-of conduct.
2015 a female customer complained about a U.S. Foods delivery
driver talking to her in a suggestive tone of voice,
inquiring if she was married, and asking how her husband
treated her. (ECF No. 15-1 at 14.) Greisbach, U.S. Foods'
human resources manager, and Persyk, U.S. Foods'
transportation manager, identified Goodwin as the driver and
met with him to get his side of the story. Griesbach found it
very difficult for Goodwin to provide his story and concluded
that his answers were evasive. (ECF No. 15-1 at 16.)
Goodwin provided the court with an email indicating that he
was terminated from his employment with U.S. Foods in July
2015, other allegations in his second amended complaint
indicate that he apparently resumed working for U.S. Foods.
(ECF No. 15-1 at 16; see also ECF No. 15, ¶ 1
(“Plaintiff was fired on July 8, 2015 and again in
October 2015 ….”)). In August 2015 U.S. Foods
received a complaint from a customer about certain errors.
The customer complained to the driver, Goodwin, who in
response referred to two of the customer's female
managers as “bitches” and said they did not
understand it was not his fault. (ECF No. 15-1 at 4.)
Foods terminated Goodwin's employment in October 2015. He
asserts that the allegations of his misconduct were false and
that the documents offered in support were fabricated.
Goodwin alleges that various employees of U.S. Foods engaged
in “blatant moral depravity, criminal conspiracy,
conspiracy to defraud, perjury, slander, and intent to
deprive Kelvin Goodwin of his Civil Rights” as well as
“gross stupidity” and “intentional
unmerciful criminal acts of destroying a black man's
opportunity to make a ...