Legal Opinion
Publius v. Boyer-Vine
District Court, E.D. California
Decided May 9, 2017No. 1:16-cv-1152-LJO-SKOPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO ALLOW PLAINTIFF DOE PUB-LIUS TO PROCEED PSEUDONY-MOUSLY (Doc. 26)
Lawrence J. O’Neill, UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
I. INTRODUCTION1
Plaintiffs Doe Publius (“Publius”) and Derek Hoskins bring this civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”), challenging California Government Code § 6254.21(c) (“§ 6254.21(c)”)2 under the First Amend*361ment, the Commerce Clause, and 47 U.S.C. § 230 (“§ 230”), against Defendant Diane F. Boyer-Vine, in her official capacity as Legislative Counsel of California. Docs. 1 & 12.
Plaintiffs subsequently…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Sealed v. Sealed 1Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- Virginia v. BlackSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Bill W. Doe v. Anthony M. Frank, Postmaster General of the United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
- Doe v. StegallCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Doe v. Kamehameha Schools/Bernice Pauahi Bishop EstateCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Arizona Board of Regents v. DoeDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2020
- Boggs v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2019
- K.W., an individual v. RED ROOF INNS, INC., et al.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2026
- R.M. v. Christopher J. LAROSE, et al.District Court, S.D. California · 2025