Doe v. Rackliffe
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the Court
*3 DiPENTIMA, C.J.
*391 The plaintiffs, James Doe and John Doe, appeal from the order of the trial court denying their motion for continued use of pseudonyms in their underlying civil action against the defendant, Robert Rackliffe, a pediatrician. On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that the court erred in denying their motion for continued use of pseudonyms (1) by requiring the plaintiffs to present live testimony at an evidentiary hearing as a prerequisite to permitting them to use pseudonyms and (2) because the existing record showed that the plaintiffs had substantial privacy interests in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. CurcioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Doe v. Connecticut Bar Examining CommitteeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Vargas v. DoeConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Doe v. Diocese Corp.Connecticut Superior Court · 1994
- Sabanovic v. SabanovicConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. Williams-BeySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
- Benvenuto v. BrookmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2024
- W.F. Groulx v. PSPCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2021