Doe v. Malden Public Library et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
JANE DOE,
Plaintiff,
v.
CONVERSE/MALDEN PUBLIC LIBRARY,
et al.,
Defendants.
No. 26-cv-11259-JDH
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HEDGES, M.J.
Pro se plaintiff “Jane Doe” has filed a civil complaint (Docket No. 1), an application to
proceed in district court without prepaying fees or costs (which I will refer to as a motion for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis) (Docket No. 2), and a motion to proceed under a pseudonym
(Docket No. 3). For the reasons stated below, I will grant the motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, deny the motion to proceed under a pseudonym, and direct Ms. Doe to file an
amended complaint under her real name if she wishes to pursue this action.
I. 	MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
Upon review of Ms. Doe’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, I conclude that
she has adequately shown that she is eligible for a waiver of the filing fee. Accordingly, the
motion is GRANTED.
II. 	MOTION TO PROCEED UNDER A PSEUDONYM
Courts have recognized a “qualified First Amendment right of public access to certain
documents filed in civil litigation.” Doe v. Mass. Inst. of Tech., 46 F.4th 61, 67 (1st Cir. 2022).
Case 1:26-cv-11259-JDH Document 5 Filed 03/24/26 Page 1 of 4

2
“[P]ublic access to judicial records and documents allows the citizenry to ‘monitor the
functioning of our courts, thereby insuring quality, honesty and respect for our legal system.’”
Id. at 68 (quoting F.T.C. v. Standard Fin. Mgmt., 830 F.2d 404, 410 (1st Cir. 1987)).
“Identifying the parties to the proceeding is an important dimension of publicness.” Id. (quoting
Doe v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wis., 112 F.3d 869, 872 (7th Cir. 1997)). “That is
because—to a certain degree—letting a party hide behind a pseudonym dims the public’s
perception of the matter and frustrates its oversight of judicial performance.” Id. Therefore,
there is a “strong presumption against the use of pseudonyms in civil litigation,” id. at 67
(quoting Does 1-3 v. Mills, 39 F.4th 20, 25 (1st Cir. 2022)), and “[t]he party seeking
pseudonymity bears the burden of rebutting the strong presumption against it.” Id. at 73.
In the complaint, Ms. Doe alleges that while she was visiting the Malden Public Library,
she assisted a child with using the internet to find information about the weather. Docket No. 1
¶¶ 6-8. A librarian who saw Ms. Doe’s interaction with the child told Ms. Doe that she was not
allowed to talk to young children at the library. Id. ¶ 9. When Ms. Doe questioned the librarian,
the “[t]he librarian stated that if plaintiff did not like it, she could leave.” Id. ¶¶ 11-12. After
leaving the library, Ms. Doe was approached in the street by a police officer for the City of
Malden. Id. ¶ 14. Ms. Doe asked the officer if she was being detained, and the officer responded
affirmatively. Id. ¶ 15. Two more officers arrived on the scene, and some members of the public
approached the library. Id. ¶¶ 20-24. During Ms. Doe’s interactions with the officers, they
stated that she was “creepy” for speaking with young children in the library, was acting
disorderly, and was trespassing. Id. ¶¶ 16-24. Ms. Doe informed one officer that “she was not at
the time, nor when any officer appeared, on the property of the ‘Malden Public library’ and
Case 1:26-cv-11259-JDH Document 5 Filed 03/24/26 Page 2 of 4

3
therefore the detention was unlawful, a Fourth amendment violation.” Id. ¶ 25. Ms. Doe seeks
damages “for public humiliation and violations of her civil rights.” Id. ¶ 27.
In the motion to proceed under a pseudonym, Ms. Doe “requests to proceed under
pseudonym due to the real threat of retaliation from the municipal police department who is
being named as a defendant in this matter.” Docket No. 3 at 1. Ms. Doe asserts that she has
“experienced [a] significant increase in local police presence as she travels through small towns
in and around the area named in this matter.” Id. Ms. Doe claims that “[l]ocal police have been
seen directly above (in a helicopter) the location the plaintiff is known to stay.” Id. Ms. Doe
states that “[t]he police department in the helicopter will be joined to this action.” Id.
This case does not present circumstances warranting the use of a pseudonym. While “a
would-be Doe who reasonably fears that coming out of the shadows will cause him unusually
severe harm” may be allowed to proceed anonymously, see Doe, 46 F.4th at 71, Ms. Doe has not
set forth grounds for reasonable fear of “unusually severe harm” if her identity is revealed. The
alleged misconduct of the defendants does not rebut the strong presumption against the use of a
pseudonym. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED.
III. 	CONCLUSION
In accordance with the foregoing, the Court hereby orders:
1. 	The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket No. 2) is GRANTED.
2. 	The motion to proceed under a pseudonym (Docket No. 3) is DENIED. If Ms.
Doe wishes to proceed with this action, she must file a complaint under her real name within
Case 1:26-cv-11259-JDH Document 5 Filed 03/24/26 Page 3 of 4

4
twenty-eight days.1 If Ms. Doe fails to do so, the Court will recommend to a District Judge that
this action be dismissed.2
SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 24, 2026 	/s/ Jessica D. Hedges
United States Magistrate Judge
1 A complaint must include a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled to relief,” see Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 8(a)(2), and must be signed by the plaintiff or the
plaintiff’s attorney, see Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 11(a). By not providing her name to the court, Ms.
Doe has failed to satisfy these requirements.
2 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a) and Rule 2(b) of the Rules for United States
Magistrate Judges in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, any party
seeking review by a district judge of these determinations and orders must serve and file any
objections within fourteen days of being served a copy of this order, unless a different time is
prescribed by the magistrate judge or the district judge.
Case 1:26-cv-11259-JDH Document 5 Filed 03/24/26 Page 4 of 4