What was the legal principle concerning the man's filing of the diversity action against the bus company?

The legal principle concerning the man's filing of the diversity action against the bus company is that the action was valid despite the limited jury. In diversity jurisdiction cases, federal courts have the authority to hear cases where the parties are from different states and the amount in controversy exceeds a certain threshold, regardless of state court limitations.

In this context, the principle is that as long as the requirements for diversity jurisdiction are met—such as the parties being citizens of different states and the dispute involving a sufficient amount in controversy—the federal court has legitimate jurisdiction to adjudicate the case. This principle underscores the purpose of diversity jurisdiction, which is to provide an impartial forum for parties who might be concerned about local biases in state courts.

While considerations such as the size of the jury or other procedural aspects may be relevant, they do not undermine the validity of the action itself under the established legal framework for diversity cases. Therefore, the validity of the action stands regardless of any limitations that might exist regarding the size of the jury or other procedural factors.