Opinion
1:21-cv-01715-RA-OTW 1:17-cv- 07954-RA-OTW
07-15-2021
JANE SMITH, MARY DOE, Plaintiffs, v. ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, Acting Commissioner of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, JASON EFFMAN, Associate Commissioner and PREA Coordinator for New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, STEVEN MAHER, Chief of Investigations, Office of Special Investigations, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, CHRISTIAN NUNEZ, Deputy Chief of the Sex Crimes Division, Office of Special Investigations, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, JOHN SHIPLEY, Director, Bureau of Labor Relations, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, SABINA KAPLAN, Superintendent of Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, MICHAEL DAYE, Deputy Superintendent for Security at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, ELAINE VELEZ, Assistant Deputy Superintendent and PREA Compliance Manager at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, CAPTAIN A, Captain at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, CAPTAIN B, Captain at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, LIEUTENANT A, Lieutenant at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, SERGEANT A, Sergeant at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, SERGEANT B, Sergeant at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, OFFICER A, Correction Officer at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, OFFICER B, Correction Officer at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, OFFICER C, Correction Officer at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, OFFICER D, Correction Officer at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, OFFICER E, Correction Officer at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, UNIDENTIFIED OFFICER, Correction Officer at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, GRIEVANCE SUPERVISOR A, Grievance Supervisor at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, INVESTIGATOR A, Investigator at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, Defendants.
PROPOSED ORDER ON PLAINTIFF DOE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY
Ona T. Wang U.S.M.J.
WHEREAS, on July 9, 2021, the newly joined Plaintiff in the abovecaptioned case moved for permission to proceed anonymously by using the pseudonym “Mary Doe”;
WHEREAS, Plaintiff Doe has demonstrated a compelling interest in proceeding anonymously;
WHEREAS, permitting Plaintiff Doe to proceed anonymously will not prejudice Defendants;
IT IS HEREBY:
ORDERED, that Plaintiff Doe's motion to proceed anonymously by using the pseudonym reflected in the caption of this Order is GRANTED;
ORDERED, that Plaintiff Doe's motion to proceed anonymously by using the pseudonyms for Defendants reflected in the caption of this Order and pseudonyms for other Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”) staff as described in the Amended Complaint is GRANTED;
ORDERED, that all public filings will proceed anonymously by using the pseudonyms reflected in this Order, and that all other filings will be under seal to the extent they reveal the identities of Plaintiff Doe, officers alleged to have engaged in sexual abuse of or retaliation against Plaintiff Doe, and other DOCCS staff as described in the Amended Complaint (apart from the supervisory Defendants identified by name in the caption of this Order); and
ORDERED, that Defendants and their legal counsel are prohibited from disclosing to a third party the names of Plaintiff Doe or the officer alleged to have engaged in the sexual abuse of or retaliation against Plaintiff Doe, or of the staff described in the Amended Complaint (apart from the supervisory Defendants identified by name in the caption of this case) unless and until the assigned District Court Judge makes a contrary ruling on confidentiality. This Order does not prohibit Defendants from consulting their legal counsel concerning the allegations of the Amended Complaint or the identities of Plaintiff Doe or the corrections staff named therein.
SO ORDERED: