§Why CasetextPricing

Opposition Objections

undefined

17 Cited authorities

  1. Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn

    420 U.S. 469 (1975)   Cited 945 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a radio station could not constitutionally be held liable for broadcasting the name of a rape victim, because the victim's name was contained in public records

  2. Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp.

    214 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 643 times
    Holding that pseudonymous filing "runs afoul of the public's common law right of access" and allowed only when necessary "to protect a person from harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment"

  3. Reno v. Baird

    18 Cal.4th 640 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 581 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that FEHA's provisions regarding employment discrimination applied only to employers, in contrast to provisions regarding harassment which did apply to individuals as well as employers

  4. Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United

    112 F.3d 869 (7th Cir. 1997)   Cited 482 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that contractual limitations periods "if reasonable are enforceable in suits under ERISA, regardless of state law"

  5. James v. Jacobson

    6 F.3d 233 (4th Cir. 1993)   Cited 358 times
    Holding an abuse of discretion is "an exercise that is flawed by erroneous factual or legal premises"

  6. Doe v. Frank

    951 F.2d 320 (11th Cir. 1992)   Cited 367 times
    Denying plaintiff permission to proceed under a pseudonym sought due to his alcoholism

  7. Doe v. Porter

    370 F.3d 558 (6th Cir. 2004)   Cited 131 times
    Finding that court did not abuse its discretion by allowing plaintiffs to proceed anonymously, where case was “brought on behalf of very young children, to whom we grant a heightened protection”

  8. Southern Methodist Univ Ass'n v. Wynne & Jaffe

    599 F.2d 707 (5th Cir. 1979)   Cited 236 times
    Holding that civil rights plaintiffs’ right to remain anonymous was "plainly independent and easily separable from ... their allegations that defendants have engaged in illegal sex discrimination"

  9. National Commodity and Barter Ass'n v. Gibbs

    886 F.2d 1240 (10th Cir. 1989)   Cited 173 times
    Holding that "the federal courts lack jurisdiction over the unnamed parties, as a case has not been commenced with respect to them"

  10. Doe v. Lincoln Unified School District

    187 Cal.App.4th 1286 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 35 times
    In Doe v. Lincoln Unified School District, supra, 188 Cal.App.4th 758, 115 Cal.Rptr.3d 191, the court of appeal noted the common practice in California courts of using pseudonyms to protect privacy, and observed federal courts have likewise permitted plaintiffs to use pseudonyms "in special circumstances when the party's need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to the opposing party and the public's interest in knowing the party's identity."