O.G. v. FRANCIS
- Vargas
- 1:25-cv-08977
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In O.G. v. Francis, Judge Vargas granted O.G.’s request to proceed under a pseudonym and directed the Clerk to terminate ECF No. 2.
O.G. may proceed under a pseudonym. The respondents, who are named in their official capacities, are affected by the court’s determination that pseudonymous litigation causes little or no prejudice to them.
What happened
In O.G. v. LaDeon FRANCIS, et al., O.G. asked to proceed under a pseudonym rather than a publicly disclosed name. The opinion does not decide the underlying petition.
The court found that the petition involved highly sensitive and personal matters. It also found little or no unfairness to the respondents because they were named in their official capacities, and concluded that O.G.’s interest in anonymity outweighed the public interest in disclosure and any prejudice to the respondents.
Judge Jeannette A. Vargas granted O.G.’s request to proceed under a pseudonym and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 2.
The detailed version
- O.G. v. FRANCIS · No. 1:25-cv-08977
- Vargas
- Nov. 5, 2025
Background
O.G. filed a petition against LaDeon FRANCIS, et al., and requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym. The opinion addresses only that request; it does not describe or resolve the underlying claims in the petition.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that O.G. made a sufficient showing that the petition involved matters that were highly sensitive and personal. The court also noted that the respondents were all named in their official capacities. It therefore concluded that allowing O.G. to use a pseudonym would cause little or no prejudice to the respondents. The court further determined that O.G.’s interest in anonymity outweighed the public interest in disclosure and any prejudice to the respondents.
Ruling
The court granted O.G.’s request for leave to proceed under a pseudonym. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 2. The opinion does not state the nature of the underlying petition or rule on its merits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.