I am in litigation with my ex employer, and a litigation is already filed in California. We are nearing a settlement, and I would want my name to be changed on the litigation to John Doe for privacy purposes. My ex-employer would not have problem to a stipulation saying that my name be changed to "John Doe". Is there such a procedure available in California courts where we could do this kind of thing?
No, not when the lawsuit has already been filed and pending for some time. There is a procedure to "seal" the court record but the reason has to be very compelling. Motions to seal records in both civil and criminal cases are governed by California Rules of Court, Rules 2.550 et seq. Under California law, unless confidentiality is required, court records are presumed to be open to the public. (CRC 2.550(c).)
If you had just used the ficitious names at the commencement of the lawsuit, it might have been proper. Code of Civil Procedure section 367 states that “[e]very action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest, except as otherwise provided by statute.” However, there have been cases which hold that plaintiffs can sue under fictitious names. Here are some examples:
In Starbucks Corp. v. Superior Court (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1436, the California Court of Appeal noted: “The judicial use of ‘Doe plaintiffs' to protect legitimate privacy rights has gained wide currency, particularly given the rapidity and ubiquity of disclosures over the World Wide Web.
In Jane Doe 8015 v. Superior Court (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 489, a patient of a clinical laboratory sued the laboratory after it was determined one of its phlebotomists had reused needles to draw blood and the plaintiff had acquired HIV as a result.
See also Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal.4th 531 [former Boy Scouts sued under pseudonyms based on allegations that city police officer sexually assaulted them while they were teenagers]; Johnson v. Superior Court (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 1050, 1072 [parents entitled to depose sperm donor with family history of kidney disease, but donor's name protected from disclosure to outsiders through an appropriate order ‘which maintains the confidentiality of John Doe's identity․’] .)”
In Doe v. Bakersfield City School District (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 556, a former student who alleged sexual abuse by a former guidance counselor was permitted to pursue his action under a fictitious name.
in Doe v. Saenz (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 960, three convicted felons were permitted to pursue legal actions under fictitious names challenging a decision by the Department of Social Services to classify their offenses as nonexemptible, thereby precluding them from working in licensed community care facilities.
In Hooper v. Deukmejian (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 987, an individual convicted on a plea of maintaining a place for selling or using a narcotic was permitted to sue under a fictitious name on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated to determine whether they were entitled to the benefits and protections of marijuana reform legislation.
The United States Supreme Court has also implicitly endorsed the use of pseudonyms to protect a plaintiff's privacy. (See, e.g., Roe v. Wade (1973) 410 U.S. 113 [abortion]; Doe v. Bolton (1973) 410 U.S. 179 [abortion]; Poe v. Ullman (1961) 367 U.S. 497 [birth control].)
I don't think you can do anything like that, especially since the litigation has been ongoing. That would also likely preclude the possibility of having the case sealed. You can try filing a motion to seal, but they are only granted on limited grounds.
Most likely not. Whenever a lawsuit is filed, it is generally open to the public, meaning that anybody can go to court and request a copy of your filed documents. As such, since your suit has been pending for quite some time now, the names have been exposed to the public. However, you can most likely motion the court to seal the record regarding your case from that point on. However, generally the court would require a compelling reason.
