Roe v. City of New York

Background

The plaintiffs filed a 272-page complaint against the City of New York, multiple officials and employees of the New York County District Attorney’s Office, the New York City Police Department, and the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board, as well as several private companies. They alleged an ongoing pattern and conspiracy involving threats, defamation, unlawful seizure, failure to intervene, obstruction of court access, and other constitutional violations and torts dating back to August 2002.

The plaintiffs proceeded without lawyers and used pseudonyms. The opinion’s caption lists the plaintiffs as John Roe, Jane Doe, and Jane Doe 2, while the body of the opinion refers to them as John Roe, Jane Roe, and Jane Roe 1. The plaintiffs had not asked for permission to proceed anonymously and had not explained why anonymity was necessary.

Anonymity requirement

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) generally requires a complaint’s title to name all parties. The court explained that anonymous litigation is allowed only in limited circumstances. It directed the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint under seal containing their real names, addresses, and signatures.

The court also allowed the plaintiffs to file a motion to proceed anonymously. That motion had to be filed under seal, identified as a “Motion to Proceed Anonymously,” and explain why anonymity should be allowed. If the motion were granted, the plaintiffs could continue using pseudonyms and access to documents identifying them would be limited. If the motion were denied, the plaintiffs would have thirty days to withdraw if they did not want to proceed under their real names.

The amended complaint would be entered on the public docket only if the anonymity motion were denied and the plaintiffs agreed to proceed under their true names.

Filing fees or applications to proceed without prepayment

The court stated that a civil action requires either payment of $400 in filing and administrative fees or an application to proceed without prepaying fees. The plaintiffs had not paid the fees and had submitted applications for only two plaintiffs, without their real names or signatures.

The court ordered each of the three plaintiffs, within thirty days, either to pay the $400 fee or to submit a signed application under seal using the plaintiff’s real name, address, and signature. The court would decide whether they could proceed without prepaying the fees. Access to any granted application would remain limited until the court decided any motion to proceed anonymously.

Related litigation and warning

The court noted a prior related proceeding, docket number 20-CV-4059 (LLS), involving many of the same defendants. In that earlier proceeding, the plaintiffs also failed to provide their real names, addresses, and signatures, failed to request permission to proceed anonymously, did not pay the filing fee, and submitted an application from only one plaintiff. That action was dismissed without prejudice after the plaintiffs failed to comply with an earlier order.

The court warned that failure to comply with this order would result in dismissal of the present action. It also noted that the Clerk might be unable to mail the order because the plaintiffs had not provided physical or email addresses.

Disposition

Judge Louis L. Stanton granted the plaintiffs leave to file under seal an amended complaint with their real names, signatures, and addresses. He ordered them to pay the filing fee or submit the required applications within thirty days. He did not decide the merits of the alleged constitutional violations or torts, did not decide whether the plaintiffs could proceed anonymously, and ordered that no summons issue at that time.