Susan Keith v. HarbourVest Partners LLC, Nanci Palladino, Sean Chau, and Jeni DiGiovanni

Keith · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · March 30, 2026 · No. 1:25-cv-11384-JEK

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted defendants’ motions to dismiss claims brought by Susan Keith under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and Massachusetts General Laws chapter 151B. The court held that Keith did not plausibly allege a causal connection between her age and the failure to hire her, and that the alleged interview conduct was not sufficiently severe or pervasive to support a hostile work environment claim. The court dismissed the federal claims with prejudice, dismissed the state-law claims without prejudice, and denied leave to file a second amended complaint.

Holdings

  1. Keith failed to plausibly allege a causal connection between her age and HarbourVest's refusal to hire her; her ADEA disparate-treatment claim was therefore dismissed.
  2. Assuming without deciding that an ADEA hostile-work-environment theory could apply to a job interview, Keith failed to plead conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to state such a claim.
  3. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Keith's remaining Massachusetts chapter 151B claims after dismissing all federal claims.
  4. Leave to file a second amended complaint was denied because amendment would be futile where the proposed pleading added no new factual allegations capable of making the ADEA claims plausible.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Keith plausibly alleged an ADEA disparate-treatment claim based on HarbourVest's failure to hire her.
  2. Whether Keith plausibly alleged an ADEA hostile-work-environment claim based on a single interview involving questions about family status and excessive typing.
  3. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Massachusetts chapter 151B claims after dismissing all federal claims.
  4. Whether Keith should be granted leave to file a second amended complaint when the proposed pleading added no new factual allegations capable of curing the deficiencies.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (29)

  • Bazinet v. Beth Israel Lahey Health, Inc., 113 F.4th 9, 15 (1st Cir. 2024)(followed)
  • Cortés-Ramos v. Martin-Morales, 956 F.3d 36, 41 (1st Cir. 2020)(followed)
  • Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 559 (2007)(followed)
  • Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009)(followed)
  • Rivera v. Centro Médico de Turabo, Inc., 575 F.3d 10, 15 (1st Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)(followed)
  • Gross v. FBL Fin. Servs., Inc., 557 U.S. 167, 177 (2009)(followed)
  • McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973)(followed)
  • Velez v. Thermo King de Puerto Rico, Inc., 585 F.3d 441, 446-47 (1st Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Walsh v. HNTB Corp., No. 24-1499, 2026 WL 710036, at *5 (1st Cir. Mar. 13, 2026)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 29.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…