Doe v. The Trustee of Columbia University in The City of New York
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:21-cv-05839
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Jane Doe v. The Trustees of Columbia University, Judge Ramos denied temporary relief without prejudice, granted pseudonym use, and ordered summonses issued.
Jane Doe and the defendants The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, Kevin Pitt, Alyssa Anzalone-Newman, and Kristin Collado.
What happened
In Jane Doe v. The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, Jane Doe, representing herself, asked for a temporary court order and permission to proceed using a pseudonym. The court also addressed starting service of the lawsuit on the defendants.
The court denied the request for preliminary injunctive relief without prejudice to renewal later because Doe had not shown that she would suffer irreparable harm without the relief. It directed the Clerk to issue summonses and told Doe to serve the defendants within 90 days after the summonses are issued, or request more time.
Judge Edgardo Ramos granted Doe’s request to proceed under a pseudonym. The court also said that an appeal would not be considered taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying appeal fees.
The detailed version
- Doe v. The Trustee of Columbia University in The City of New York · No. 1:21-cv-05839
- Edgardo Ramos
- July 13, 2021
Background
Jane Doe paid the filing fee and is proceeding without a lawyer. She filed a complaint against The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York, Kevin Pitt, Alyssa Anzalone-Newman, and Kristin Collado. The order does not describe the underlying claims or the events giving rise to them. Doe requested preliminary injunctive relief, meaning a temporary court order issued before the case is finally decided, and asked to proceed under a pseudonym.
Preliminary Injunctive Relief
To obtain preliminary injunctive relief, Doe had to show likely irreparable harm and either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions for litigation combined with a strongly favorable balance of hardships. The court found that, at this stage, she had not shown that she would suffer irreparable harm without the requested relief. The court therefore denied the motion for preliminary injunctive relief without prejudice to renewal at a later stage.
Summonses and Service
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for all four defendants. Doe must serve each defendant with the summons and complaint within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If she does not serve the defendants or request an extension within that period, the court stated that it may dismiss the claims under Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute.
Pseudonym and Appeal Determinations
The court granted Doe’s request to proceed under a pseudonym. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The order did not decide the merits of Doe’s underlying claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.