Roe v. Smith (CA2/2 B344378 11/21/25) Pseudonyms for Parties (rule in DFEH v. Superior Court (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 105 applied) – Employment Law Weekly

Roe v. Smith (CA2/2 B344378 11/21/25) Pseudonyms for Parties (rule in DFEH v. Superior Court (2022) 82 Cal.App.5th 105 applied)

Phyllis W. Cheng, Esq.

ADR Services Mediator, Former Director of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”)

November 21, 2025

Movant First Amendment Coalition (the Coalition) appeals the trial court’s order granting plaintiffs’ motion to proceed under pseudonyms. We conclude the trial court erred in its balancing of the public’s interest in court access. Accordingly, we reverse the order as to plaintiffs.

https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B344378.PDF

There are 0 comments

Share:

More Posts

Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC (US 24-1238 oral argument 3/5/26) Preemption | Negligent Selection of Driver by Broker

Does 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c) preempt a state common-law claim against a broker for negligently selecting a motor carrier or driver? Oral Argument Transcript Oral

Uber Technologies, Inc. v. City of Seattle (9th Cir. 25-228 3/4/26) First Amendment | Seattle’s App-Based Worker Deactivation Rights Ordinance

The panel affirmed the district court’s denial of a motion by Uber Technologies, Inc. and Maplebear Inc. for a preliminary injunction to enjoin the City

Sorokunov v. NetApp, Inc. (CA1/4 A171964 3/3/26) Arbitration | PAGA

Plaintiff Alexander Sorokunov sued his former employer NetApp, Inc. (NetApp), alleging various violations of the Labor Code. He also sought civil penalties and wages pursuant

Ehrenkranz v. S.F. Zen Center (CA1/2 A171527 3/2/26) First Amendment Ministerial Exception

Plaintiff Michael Ehrenkranz filed claims with the Labor Commissioner against San Francisco Zen Center (Center), Linda Galijan, and Mike Smith (when referred to collectively, defendants)

Send Us A Message