Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 22STCV26150, Date: 2022-08-23 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV26150    Hearing Date: August 23, 2022    Dept: 48

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On August 12, 2022, Plaintiff D.E. filed this action against Doe 1, arising from childhood sexual assault.  On August 17, 2022, Plaintiff filed an ex parte application to approve and seal the certificates of merit, permit service on Doe 1, and permit Plaintiff to proceed under a fictitious name.

A.        Seal Certificates of Merit

A plaintiff who is 40 years of age or older in an action arising from childhood sexual assault must file certificates of merit executed by the attorney for the plaintiff and by a licensed mental health practitioner selected by the plaintiff, and the court must review them in camera.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subds. (f)-(g), (i).)

Because records examined in camera must be filed under seal (California Rules of Court, rule 2.585(b)), the request to seal Plaintiff’s Certificates of Merit is granted.

B.        Permit Service on Defendant

A defendant may not be served until the court has reviewed the certificates of merit in camera and found, based solely on those certificates of merit, that there is reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action against that defendant.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 340.1, subd. (i).)

Plaintiff’s Certificates of Merit from her counsel and a licensed mental health practitioner comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1, subdivision (g).  The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Certificates of Merit and finds that there is reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action against Doe 1.  Accordingly, the request for permission to serve Doe 1 is granted.

C.        Plaintiff’s Fictitious Name

“‘[A] party may preserve his or her anonymity in judicial proceedings in special circumstances when the party’s need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to the opposing party and the public’s interest in knowing the party’s identity.’”  (Doe v. Lincoln Unified School Dist. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 758, 767, quoting Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp. (9th Cir. 2000) 214 F.3d 1058, 1068.)

Plaintiff alleges that the defendants placed and kept her in foster care, where she was repeatedly sexually assaulted and abused by a foster parent and foster brother, despite the defendants’ knowledge of the abuse.  Actions alleging childhood sexual abuse are appropriate circumstances for a plaintiff’s use of a pseudonym.  (See, e.g., Doe v. Bakersfield City School Dist. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 556.)  The Court finds that Plaintiff’s need for anonymity outweighs any prejudice and the public’s interest in knowing her identity.  Accordingly, the request is granted, and Plaintiff may proceed under the fictitious name “D.E.”

D.        Conclusion

The ex parte application is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit.  Parties intending to appear are encouraged to appear remotely and should be prepared to comply with Dept. 48’s new requirement that those attending court in person wear a surgical or N95 or KN95 mask.

         Dated this 23rd day of August 2022