Judge cuts claims from ex-assistant’s suit against Vin Diesel

LOS ANGELES (CN) — A superior court judge dismissed four claims Tuesday in a lawsuit brought by Vin Diesel’s former assistant, narrowing the case but leaving key allegations, including sexual battery, intact.

“This has been a frivolous case from the outset,” said Diesel’s attorney, Bryan Freedman of Liner Freedman Taitelman and Cooley, after the hearing. “It’s a shame that cases like this are allowed to move forward in the courts.”

Filed in LA Superior Court in 2023, Asta Jonasson’s complaint said she was hired as Diesel’s personal assistant in 2010, while the actor was filming the fifth movie in the “Fast and Furious” series. One night, she said, she found herself alone in a hotel suite with Diesel in Atlanta.

“Vin Diesel forcibly grabbed Ms. Jonasson, groped her breasts, and kissed her,” she wrote in her complaint. “Ms. Jonasson struggled continually to break free of his grasp, while repeatedly saying no.” He “pinned her against the wall with his body, and grabbed Ms. Jonasson’s hand and placed it on his erect penis.” Later, he “pulled his penis out of his underwear and began to masturbate, while leaning against Ms. Jonasson and keeping her pinned to the wall with the left side of his body.” After he finished, he went to the bathroom to wash up, and as he left the hotel suite he said, “No one can say shit about Asta."

Hours after the assault, Jonasson said in her complaint, she received a phone call from Diesel’s sister, Samantha Vincent, president of One Race Films, Diesel’s production company. Vincent informed Jonasson that they no longer needed “any extra help." Jonasson had been fired.

Jonasson sued Diesel for sexual battery, wrongful termination and four claims under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Diesel filed for judgment on the pleadings, arguing Jonasson’s administrative complaint, required under FEHA, was submitted after the one-year deadline. While California extended the statute of limitations for sexual assault lawsuits, Diesel claimed the extension didn’t apply to administrative filings.

Her attorney, Matthew Hale of Greenberg Gross, begged to differ, saying that the California legislature extended all statutes of limitation, including those deadlines for administrative complaints.

“It would be an absurdity to not revive these administrative claims,” Hale told the judge.

Freedman’s colleague Sean Hardy disagreed.

“The legislature does not hide elephants in mouse holes,” he quipped. “If the legislature truly intended to revive FEHA administrative claims, it could have.”

Judge Crowley agreed with Diesel’s attorneys and dismissed the four FEHA claims.

After the hearing, Hale said in an email: “While we respectfully disagree with the court’s decision on this limited legal issue, the Court made no factual findings that impact the remaining causes of action in this case.  We will continue to advocate vigorously on behalf of our client, who remains committed to seeking justice.”

Freedman said that he would soon file a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the rest of the case, and that he would advise Diesel to file his own lawsuit for malicious prosecution.

A jury trial is currently scheduled for August.

Follow @hillelaron