Jenny v. Mollick
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:23-cv-05634
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Jenny v. Mollick, Judge A G. Tse granted the plaintiffs’ request to use pseudonyms because disclosure could expose them to continuing humiliation and harassment.
The plaintiffs, who were depicted in the seized images, may proceed under pseudonyms rather than publicly disclosed names. Joseph Andrew Mollick is the defendant. The order concerns anonymity and does not resolve the damages claims.
What happened
In Jenny v. Mollick, plaintiffs depicted in child sexual-abuse images seized from Joseph Andrew Mollick brought a civil damages action and asked to use pseudonyms.
The court found that the plaintiffs’ identities should remain secret because the images were highly personal and violating, and disclosure could lead to continuing humiliation and harassment related to their victimization as children. The court granted the motion to proceed pseudonymously.
Judge A G. Tse issued the order on December 5, 2023, allowing the plaintiffs to proceed under the pseudonyms listed in the order.
The detailed version
- Jenny v. Mollick · No. 3:23-cv-05634
- Vince Chhabria
- Dec. 5, 2023
Background
The plaintiffs were depicted in child sexual-abuse images seized from Joseph Andrew Mollick. The opinion states that Mollick had pleaded guilty in January 2023 to knowingly possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2), and that he was sentenced and judgment was entered against him in May 2023. The plaintiffs brought this civil action seeking damages and moved to proceed under pseudonyms.
Reasoning
The court explained that federal courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, may allow parties to proceed anonymously when special circumstances justify secrecy. Such circumstances exist when nondisclosure is necessary to protect a person from harassment, injury, ridicule, or personal embarrassment. The court found that the plaintiffs had shown the highly personal and violating nature of the images and had demonstrated that they faced continuing humiliation and harassment because they had been victimized and sexually exploited as young children.
Ruling
The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to proceed pseudonymously. The order allowed them to proceed under the pseudonyms “Jenny,” “Raven,” “Anna,” “Cara,” “Lily,” “Sarah,” “Savannah,” “Skylar,” “Maureen,” “Violet,” “Jessy,” “Pia,” “Mya,” “Maria,” “Jane Doe,” and “Alena Doe.” The opinion’s footnotes state that Jane Doe is the mother and conservator of Skylar and Savannah, and that Aleana Doe is the mother and next friend of Maria. The order addressed anonymity and did not decide the plaintiffs’ civil damages claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.