Anonymous plaintiff loses appeal

This fellow brought a lawsuit pro se, claiming that local officials in upstate New York violated his rights under Section 1983 arising from their alleged failure to seal records pertaining to criminal records from his youth. The problem is that plaintiff wants to proceed anonymously and will not use his real name in the lawsuit. What does the court do in a case like this?

The case is Publius Publicola v. Lomenzo, issued on November 29. The answer to that question is the case was dismissed, not because plaintiff has no case on the merits but because he will not use his real name in pursuing the lawsuit. Since his mother did not name him Publius Publicola, and he will not comply with court rules that allow him to proceed anonymously, the case is over.

Plaintiffs can proceed anonymously in certain circumstances, but they must follow certain rules. One of those rules is that the trial court must grant permission to do so or disclose their identity to the court. This plaintiff ignored the trial court's order to comply with these rules, and the case was dismissed. The Court of Appeals (Sack, Sullivan and Lee) agrees that plaintiff cannot proceed with the case. In fact, he cannot even proceed with the appeal. The Court dismisses the appeal because plaintiff would not comply with the Court of Appeals' order that he not sign his appellate briefs under a pseudonym.

The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require litigants to disclose their identity to the court. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure say the same thing. Why? Because it facilitates public scrutiny of judicial proceedings and the public's right to know who is using their courts. The rule also ensures that parties take responsibility for their court filings so that courts can sanction lawyers and parties for abusing the court system. This rule also protects against potential conflicts of interest. You can get permission from the court to waive this rule, but this plaintiff did not comply with that procedure. 

In the end, plaintiff's failure to comply with Rule 32(d) means the case is dismissed.