## Facts

- A woman alleged that Tupac A. Shakur and Charles L. Fuller sexually assaulted her on November 18, 1993.
- In a prior New York state criminal case arising from the same incident, a jury convicted Shakur and Fuller of sexual abuse and acquitted them of other charges; their appeals were pending when the federal civil case was filed.
- Plaintiff filed a federal diversity action seeking $10 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitive damages.
- Before filing, plaintiff obtained an ex parte order that sealed the complaint and permitted a substitute complaint using the pseudonym “Jane Doe.”
- Defendants failed to answer timely; the Clerk entered defaults.
- Shakur moved to vacate the defaults and, in served motion papers, identified plaintiff by her real name.
- Plaintiff objected, arguing the ex parte order required use of “Jane Doe” in all filings or, alternatively, that the court should allow her to proceed pseudonymously throughout the case.

## Issues

1. Whether, in a civil damages action alleging sexual assault, the plaintiff may prosecute the case under a pseudonym despite Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) and the presumption of public access to judicial proceedings.
2. Whether an ex parte sealing order permitting a pseudonymous sealed complaint required the parties to use only the pseudonym in later filings.

## Decision

- The court held plaintiff could not prosecute the action under a pseudonym and overruled her objection to defendants’ use of her real name in filings.
- The court construed the earlier ex parte order as limited to sealing the complaint and permitting a pseudonymous sealed filing, not as authorizing pseudonymous litigation for the entire case.
- The court declined to extend anonymity because plaintiff’s showing amounted primarily to embarrassment and unwanted publicity, and she had already been publicly identified in related criminal proceedings.
- The case was to proceed under plaintiff’s real name consistent with Rule 10(a) and open-court principles.

## Legal Principles

- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) generally requires that pleadings name all parties, serving both notice to opponents and the public interest in open judicial proceedings.
- Pseudonymous litigation is an exception permitted only in limited circumstances where privacy or safety interests substantially outweigh defendants’ fairness interests and the public’s right of access.
- When a plaintiff voluntarily initiates a private civil damages action accusing identified defendants, anonymity is strongly disfavored because it can create unfair asymmetry and impede public scrutiny of credibility-based allegations.
- Prior public disclosure of the plaintiff’s identity in related proceedings reduces the incremental privacy protection of anonymity and weighs against departing from Rule 10(a).
- Generalized fears of humiliation or renewed attention, without evidence of a materially increased risk of serious harm, are insufficient to justify pseudonymous prosecution of a civil damages suit.

## Conclusion

The court required the plaintiff to proceed under her real name, holding that Rule 10(a), fairness to defendants, and the presumption of open judicial proceedings outweighed the plaintiff’s asserted privacy concerns in this private sexual-assault damages action, particularly given prior public identification and the absence of evidence of heightened risk of serious harm.


Doe v. Shakur, 164 F.R.D. 359 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)