John Doe: Difference between revisions

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by OtterFish (talk) to last version by ClueBot NG
major cleanup, inc add ref
Line 2: Line 2:
{{redirect|Jane Doe||Jane Doe (disambiguation)}}
{{redirect|Jane Doe||Jane Doe (disambiguation)}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2011}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2011}}
The names "'''John Doe'''" or "'''John Roe'''" for men, "'''Jane Doe'''" or "'''Jane Roe'''" for women, "'''Johnny Doe'''" and "'''Janie Doe'''" for children, or just "'''Doe'''" non-gender-specifically are used as [[placeholder name]]s for a party whose true identity is unknown or must be withheld in a legal action, case, or discussion.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/ceos-delego-indictment-twitched.pdf |title=Twitched Indictment|publisher=Justice.gov|accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref> The names are also used to refer to a [[Dead body|corpse]] or hospital patient whose identity is unknown. This practice is widely used in the [[United States]] and [[Canada]], but is rarely used in other English-speaking countries including the [[United Kingdom]], from which the use of "John Doe" in a legal context originates. The names "'''[[Joe Bloggs]]'''" or "'''John Smith'''" are used in the UK as placeholder names (mainly to mean 'any old person', the classic '[[Everyman]]'){{citation needed|date=June 2012}} as well as in Australia and New Zealand.{{citation needed|date=April 2016}}
"'''John Doe'''" , "'''John Roe'''" or "'''Richard Roe'''" (for men), "'''Jane Doe'''" or "'''Jane Roe'''" (for women), and "'''Baby Doe'''", "'''Janie Doe'''" or "'''Johnny Doe'''" (for children), or just "'''Doe'''" or "'''Roe'''" are [[multiple-use name]]s that have two distinct usages. Firstly, and especially in the [[United States]], [[Canada]] and [[Ireland]], they may refer to an unidentified person, or a [[party (law)|party in a legal action]] whose identity is being withheld officially.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/ceos-delego-indictment-twitched.pdf |title=Twitched Indictment|publisher=Justice.gov|accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref> <ref name="ireland"/> In the context of [[law enforcement in the United States]], such names are often used in to refer to a [[Dead body|corpse]], whose identity is unknown or unconfirmed. Secondly, such names are also often used to refer to a hypothetical "[[everyman]]" in other contexts, in a manner similar to "'''[[John Q. Public]]'''" or "Joe Public".


In other [[English-speaking countries]], unique placeholder names, numbers and/or [[codename]]s have become more often used in the context of police investigations. This has included the [[United Kingdom]], where usage of "John Doe" originated during the [[Middle Ages]]. However, the legal term [[John Doe injunction]] (or John Doe Order),<ref name="order">{{cite web|url=http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=30920&sectioncode=1 |title=Obtaining a John Doe order |publisher=PressGazette |date= |accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref> has survived in [[English law]] and other legal systems influenced by it. Other names used informally such as "'''[[Joe Bloggs]]'''" or "'''John Smith'''" have sometimes been informally used as placeholders for an everyman in the UK, [[Australia]] and [[New Zealand]], such names are seldom used in legal or police circles in the same sense as John Doe.
==Usage==
John Doe is sometimes used to refer to a ''typical'' male in other contexts as well, in a similar manner to [[John Q. Public]] in the United States or Joe Public, John Smith or [[Joe Bloggs]] in Britain. For example: the first name listed on a form might be John Doe, along with a fictional address or other fictional information to provide an example of how to fill in the form. The name is also used frequently in US popular culture, for example in the [[Frank Capra]] film ''[[Meet John Doe]]''. ''John Doe'' was also the name of a [[John Doe (TV series)|2002 American television series]].


Well-known legal cases named after placeholders include:
Similarly, a child or baby whose identity is unknown may be referred to as '''Baby Doe'''. A notorious murder case in [[Kansas City, Missouri]], referred to the baby victim as [[Precious Doe]].<ref>{{cite news
* the landmark 1973 [[Supreme Court of the United States|US Supreme Court]] decision regarding abortion: ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' (1973) and;
|last=Goldblatt
* the civil cases ''McKeogh v. John Doe'' (Ireland; 2012) and ''Uber Technologies, Inc. v. Doe I'' (California; 2015).<ref name="ireland">[http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/219f33309598cd3980257a00003d3c0e?OpenDocument ''McKeogh v. John Doe'']</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/3:2015cv00908/285209|title=Uber Technologies, Inc. v. Doe I|work=Justia Dockets & Filings}}</ref>
|first=Jeff
|title=Slain Mystery Girl Brings Community Together
|publisher=FOX News Network
|date=8 August 2002
|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59905,00.html
|accessdate=30 June 2006
}}</ref> Other unidentified female murder victims have also been nicknamed by the public or investigators as "[[Murder of Tammy Alexander|Cali Doe]]" and "[[Princess Doe]]". Additional persons may be called James Doe, Judy Doe, etc. However, to avoid possible confusion, if two anonymous or unknown parties are cited in a specific case or action, the surnames Doe and Roe may be used simultaneously; for example, "''John Doe v. Jane Roe''{{-"}}. If several anonymous parties are referenced, they may simply be labelled John Doe #1, John Doe #2, etc. (the U.S. [[Operation Delego]] cited 21 (numbered) "John Doe"s) or labelled with [[John Doe#Other variants|other variants]] of Doe / Roe / Poe / etc. Other early alternatives such as '''John Stiles''' and '''Richard Miles''' are now rarely used, and '''Mary Major''' has been used in some American federal cases.<ref name="wwwords">{{cite web |url=http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-joh2.htm |publisher=World Wide Words |title=John Doe |author=Quinion M |date=15 March 2003 |accessdate=26 November 2008}}</ref>

The Doe names are also used for anonymous or unknown [[defendants]]. Another set of names used for anonymous parties, particularly [[plaintiff]]s, are '''Richard Roe''' for men and '''Jane Roe''' for women (as in the landmark [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] abortion decision ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'').

Bearing the actual name John Doe can cause difficulty, such as being stopped by airport security or suspected of being an incognito celebrity.<ref name="nyt2009">{{cite news |url=http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/a-name-only-a-lawyer-could-love/ | title=Meet John Doe. No, really! |author=Alison Leigh Cowan |date=29 July 2009 |accessdate=5 August 2009 |work=The New York Times}}</ref>

The term is sometimes used in lawsuits in Ireland and the United States; see, for example ''McKeogh v. John Doe''<ref>[http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/219f33309598cd3980257a00003d3c0e?OpenDocument ''McKeogh v. John Doe'']</ref> and ''Uber Technologies, Inc. v. Doe I''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/3:2015cv00908/285209|title=Uber Technologies, Inc. v. Doe I|work=Justia Dockets & Filings}}</ref>


Use of "John Doe" in the sense of an everyman, includes:
The term John Doe or Jane Doe is used in US police investigations when the identity of the victim(s) is unknown or incorrect.
* the 1941 film ''[[Meet John Doe]]'' and;
* the 2002 US television series [[John Doe (TV series)|''John Doe'']].


==Origin==
==History==
Under the [[Roman law|legal terminology of Ancient Rome]], the names [[Numerius Negidius|"''Numerius Negidius''"]] and "''Aulus Agerius''" were used in relation to hypothetical defendants and [[plaintiff]]s.
The names "John Doe" and "Richard Roe," along with "John Roe" or "Doo" were regularly invoked in English legal instruments to satisfy technical requirements governing standing and jurisdiction, beginning perhaps as early as the reign of England's King [[Edward III of England|Edward III]] (1327–1377).<ref name="Webster1996">{{cite book |title=What's In A Name |publisher=Merriam-Webster |year=1996 |isbn=978-0-87779-613-8}}{{page needed|date=January 2014}}</ref>


Other fictitious names for a person involved in litigation under English law were ''John-Noakes'', or ''John Noakes/Nokes'' and John-a-Stiles/John Stiles.<ref name="Noakes">{{cite web|url=http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-joh2.htm |title=World Wide Words – John DoeZ|publisher=Worldwidewords.org|accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref>
The name "John Doe" (or "John Doo"), "Richard Roe," along with "John Roe", were regularly invoked in English legal instruments to satisfy technical requirements governing standing and jurisdiction, beginning perhaps as early as the reign of England's King [[Edward III of England|Edward III]] (1327–1377).<ref name="Webster1996">{{cite book |title=What's In A Name |publisher=Merriam-Webster |year=1996 |isbn=978-0-87779-613-8}}{{page needed|date=January 2014}}</ref> Other fictitious names for a person involved in litigation in medieval English law were "John Noakes" (or "Nokes") and "John-a-Stiles" (or "John Stiles").<ref name="Noakes">{{cite web|url=http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-joh2.htm |title=World Wide Words – John DoeZ|publisher=Worldwidewords.org|accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref>


The ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' states that John Doe is "the name given to the [[legal fiction|fictitious]] lessee of the plaintiff, in the (now obsolete in the UK) mixed action of [[ejectment]], the fictitious defendant being called Richard Roe".
The ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' states that John Doe is "the name given to the [[legal fiction|fictitious]] lessee of the plaintiff, in the (now obsolete in the UK) mixed action of [[ejectment]], the fictitious defendant being called Richard Roe".
Line 43: Line 32:
John Doe and Richard Roe ...<ref name=songster>{{cite book|title=The Universal Songster: Or, Museum of Mirth: Forming the Most Complete, Extensive, and Valuable Collection of Ancient and Modern Songs in the English Language, with a Copious and Classified Index, Volume 1|date=1827|publisher=Jones and Company|location=London|page=378|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VWQLAAAAYAA|accessdate=18 September 2015}}</ref>
John Doe and Richard Roe ...<ref name=songster>{{cite book|title=The Universal Songster: Or, Museum of Mirth: Forming the Most Complete, Extensive, and Valuable Collection of Ancient and Modern Songs in the English Language, with a Copious and Classified Index, Volume 1|date=1827|publisher=Jones and Company|location=London|page=378|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VWQLAAAAYAA|accessdate=18 September 2015}}</ref>
</poem></blockquote></div>
</poem></blockquote></div>

This particular use became obsolete in the UK in 1852:
This particular use became obsolete in the UK in 1852:
<blockquote>As is well known, the device of involving real people as notional lessees and ejectors was used to enable freeholders to sue the real ejectors. These were then replaced by the fictional characters John Doe and Richard Roe. Eventually the medieval remedies were (mostly) abolished by the Real Property Limitation Act of 1833; the fictional characters of John Doe and Richard Roe by the Common Law Procedure Act 1852; and the forms of action themselves by the Judicature Acts 1873–75." <br />''Secretary of State for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Respondent) v Meier and another(FC) (Appellant) and others and another (FC)(Appellant) and another (2009).''<ref name="SC">{{cite web|url=http://www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2009_0087_Judgment.pdf |publisher=Supremecourt.gov.uk|title=Supreme Court Decided Cases (pdf)|accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref></blockquote>
<blockquote>As is well known, the device of involving real people as notional lessees and ejectors was used to enable freeholders to sue the real ejectors. These were then replaced by the fictional characters John Doe and Richard Roe. Eventually the medieval remedies were (mostly) abolished by the Real Property Limitation Act of 1833; the fictional characters of John Doe and Richard Roe by the Common Law Procedure Act 1852; and the forms of action themselves by the Judicature Acts 1873–75." <br />''Secretary of State for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Respondent) v Meier and another(FC) (Appellant) and others and another (FC)(Appellant) and another (2009).''<ref name="SC">{{cite web|url=http://www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2009_0087_Judgment.pdf |publisher=Supremecourt.gov.uk|title=Supreme Court Decided Cases (pdf)|accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref></blockquote> In the UK, usage of "John Doe" survives mainly in the form of John Doe Injunction or John Doe Order (see above).<blockquote>8.02 If an unknown person has possession of the confidential personal information and is threatening to disclose it, a 'John Doe' injunction may be sought against that person. The first time this form of injunction was used since 1852 in the United Kingdom was in 2005 when lawyers acting for JK Rowling and her publishers obtained an interim order against an unidentified person who had offered to sell chapters of a stolen copy of an unpublished Harry Potter novel to the media.<ref name="uae">{{cite web|url=http://www.uea.ac.uk/law |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20030707131130/http://www.uea.ac.uk/law/resources/8-02.htm |archivedate=7 July 2003 |title=THE LAW OF PROFESSIONAL-CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY: Regulating the Disclosure of Confidential Personal Information, Update |website=Uea.ac.uk}}</ref></blockquote> Unlike the United States, the name "John Doe" does not actually appear in the formal name of the case, for example: X & Y v Persons Unknown [2007] HRLR 4.<ref name="eady">{{cite web|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmcumeds/memo/press/uc7502.htm |title=Uncorrected Evidence 75 |publisher=Publications.parliament.uk |date=18 February 2009 |accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref>


Well-known cases of unidentified corpses include "[[Murder of Tammy Alexander|Cali Doe]]" (1979) and "[[Princess Doe]]" (1982). The baby victim in a 2001 murder case in [[Kansas City, Missouri]], was referred to as [[Precious Doe]].<ref>{{cite news
The term 'John Doe Injunction' (or John Doe Order)<ref name="order">{{cite web|url=http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=30920&sectioncode=1 |title=Obtaining a John Doe order |publisher=PressGazette |date= |accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref> is used in the UK to describe an [[injunction]] sought against someone whose identity is not known at the time it is issued:<blockquote>"8.02 If an unknown person has possession of the confidential personal information and is threatening to disclose it, a 'John Doe' injunction may be sought against that person. The first time this form of injunction was used since 1852 in the United Kingdom was in 2005 when lawyers acting for JK Rowling and her publishers obtained an interim order against an unidentified person who had offered to sell chapters of a stolen copy of an unpublished Harry Potter novel to the media".<ref name="uae">{{cite web|url=http://www.uea.ac.uk/law |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20030707131130/http://www.uea.ac.uk/law/resources/8-02.htm |archivedate=7 July 2003 |title=THE LAW OF PROFESSIONAL-CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY: Regulating the Disclosure of Confidential Personal Information, Update |website=Uea.ac.uk}}</ref></blockquote> Unlike in the United States the name (John) Doe does not actually appear in the formal name of the case, for example: X & Y v Persons Unknown [2007] HRLR 4.<ref name="eady">{{cite web|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmcumeds/memo/press/uc7502.htm |title=Uncorrected Evidence 75 |publisher=Publications.parliament.uk |date=18 February 2009 |accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref>
|last=Goldblatt
|first=Jeff
|title=Slain Mystery Girl Brings Community Together
|publisher=FOX News Network
|date=8 August 2002
|url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59905,00.html
|accessdate=30 June 2006
}}</ref>


In 2009, the ''New York Times'' reported the difficulties and unwanted attention experienced by a man actually named John Doe, who had often been suspected of using a [[pseudonym]]. He had been questioned repeatedly by airport security staff and suspected of being an incognito celebrity.<ref name="nyt2009">{{cite news |url=http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/a-name-only-a-lawyer-could-love/ | title=Meet John Doe. No, really! |author=Alison Leigh Cowan |date=29 July 2009 |accessdate=5 August 2009 |work=The New York Times}}</ref>
==Court cases==

* The [[landmark decision|landmark]] 1973 United States Supreme Court [[abortion]] cases ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' and ''[[Doe v. Bolton]]'' get half of their names from anonymous plaintiffs Jane Roe and Mary Doe, women later revealed to be named [[Norma McCorvey]] and Sandra Cano.
==Other variants==
In cases where a large number of unidentified individuals are mentioned, numbers may be appended, such as "Doe #2" or "Doe II". [[Operation Delego]] (2009), whbich targeted an international child sexual abuse ring, cited 21 numbered "John Does", as well as well as other people known by the surnames "Doe", "Roe", and "Poe".

"John Stiles", "Richard Miles" have been used for the third and fourth participants in an action. "Mary Major" has been used in some [[Federal judiciary of the United States|federal cases in the US]].<ref name="wwwords">{{cite web |url=http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-joh2.htm |publisher=World Wide Words |title=John Doe |author=Quinion M |date=15 March 2003 |accessdate=26 November 2008}}</ref> "James Doe" and "Judy Doe" are among other common variants.

Less often, other surnames ending in ''-oe'' have been used when more than two unknown or unidentified persons are named in U.S. court proceedings, ''e.g.'', ''Poe v. Snyder'', 834 F.Supp.2d 721 (W. D. Mich. 2011),<ref>{{cite web |title=Poe v. Snyder|url=http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020111228719|website=www.leagle.com}}</ref> whose full style is
* ''Jane Poe, John Doe, Richard Roe, Robert Roe, Mark Moe, Larry Loe, Degage Ministries, and Mel Trotter Ministries, Plaintiffs, v. Rick Snyder, Governor of the State of Michigan, Bill Schuette, Attorney General of the State of Michigan, Kriste Etue, Director of the Michigan State Police, William Forsyth, Kent County Prosecutor, in their official capacities, Defendants'' and;
* ''Friedman v. Ferguson'', No. 87-3758, unpublished disposition, 850 F.2d 689 (4th Cir., 29 June 1988),<ref>{{cite web |title=''Friedman v. Ferguson'' |url=http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/850/689/3734/ |website=Law.justia.com}}</ref> whose full style is
:''Wilbur H. Friedman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Thomas B. FERGUSON, Director, Department of Animal Control, a State Actor, In His Official and Individual Capacities; Brett Boe; Carla Coe; Donna Doe; Frank Foe; Grace Goe; Harry Hoe; State Actors, Advisors To Defendant Ferguson, In Their Official and Individual Capacities (identities currently unknown); Marta Moe; Norma Noe; Paula Poe; Ralph Roe; Sammy Soe; Tommy Toe; Private Individuals Who Conspired With the Foregoing State Actors (identities currently unknown); Roger W. Galvin, Chairman, Animal Matters Hearing Board; Vince Voe; William Woe; Xerxes Xoe; Members of the Animal Matters Hearing Board, State Actors, In Their Official and Individual Capacities (identities currently unknown), Defendants-Appellees''.<ref>Note that the plaintiff-appellant Friedman represented himself, so his use of fictitious names may not reflect legal custom.</ref>

Parallels in other countries include:
* "Ashok Kumar" has been used in court cases in [[India]];<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/article3258958.ece |title='Kolaveri' against piracy |author=R Balaji |newspaper=The Hindu Business Line |date=29 March 2012}}</ref>
* the abbreviation ''[[N.N.]]'', which is commonly used in European legal systems, as an abbreviation for Latin terms such as
** ''[[nomen nescio]]'' ("I do not know the name") in [[Belgium]], [[Germany]], [[Italy]] and [[Serbia]] and;
** ''[[nomen nominandum]]'' ("the name must be mentioned") in the [[Netherlands]].

Since 1903 a hypothetical "ordinary and [[reasonable person]]" has often been known, in the legal parlance of the UK and other Commonwealth countries as "[[the man on the Clapham omnibus]]".<ref>''McQuire v Western Morning News'' [1903] 2 {{abbr|K.B.|King's Bench}} 100 at 109 per Collins MR.</ref><ref>{{Citation |editor-last=Room|editor-first=Richard |year=1996 |title=Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable |edition=15th |publisher=Cassell |page=761 |isbn=0062701339 }}</ref>

==Famous court cases==
* The [[landmark decision|landmark]] 1973 [[abortion]] cases ''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' and ''[[Doe v. Bolton]]'' get their names from anonymous plaintiffs later revealed to be, respectively, [[Norma McCorvey]] and Sandra Cano.
* A [[Toronto]] woman, publicly known only as Jane Doe, waged an 11-year court battle against the [[Toronto Police Service]] after being [[rape]]d in 1986, alleging that the police had used her as bait to catch [[Paul Callow|the Balcony Rapist]]. She won the case in 1998, and was named ''[[Chatelaine (magazine)|Chatelaine]]'''s Woman of the Year that year.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.walnet.org/jane_doe/news/toronto_99/chatelaine-9901.html |title=Who is JANE DOE? |publisher=Walnet.org |date= |accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref> She published a book about her experience, ''The Story of Jane Doe: A Book about Rape'', in 2003.
* A [[Toronto]] woman, publicly known only as Jane Doe, waged an 11-year court battle against the [[Toronto Police Service]] after being [[rape]]d in 1986, alleging that the police had used her as bait to catch [[Paul Callow|the Balcony Rapist]]. She won the case in 1998, and was named ''[[Chatelaine (magazine)|Chatelaine]]'''s Woman of the Year that year.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.walnet.org/jane_doe/news/toronto_99/chatelaine-9901.html |title=Who is JANE DOE? |publisher=Walnet.org |date= |accessdate=2 October 2012}}</ref> She published a book about her experience, ''The Story of Jane Doe: A Book about Rape'', in 2003.
* A [[Doe subpoena]] is an investigatory tool that a plaintiff may use to seek the identity of an unknown defendant. Doe subpoenas are often served on [[online service provider]]s and [[ISP]]s to obtain the identity of the author of an [[anonymous post]].<ref>See, for example, ''Dendrite International, Inc. v. Doe'', {{cite web|url=http://pub.bna.com/eclr/277400t3.htm |title=775 A.2d 756 }} (N.J. App. Div. 2001); ''Krinsky v. Doe 6'', {{cite web|url=http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/H030767.PDF |title=159 Cal. App. 4th 1154 (pdf) }}{{dead link|date=April 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} (2008).</ref>
* A [[Doe subpoena]] is an investigatory tool that a plaintiff may use to seek the identity of an unknown defendant. Doe subpoenas are often served on [[online service provider]]s and [[ISP]]s to obtain the identity of the author of an [[anonymous post]].<ref>See, for example, ''Dendrite International, Inc. v. Doe'', {{cite web|url=http://pub.bna.com/eclr/277400t3.htm |title=775 A.2d 756 }} (N.J. App. Div. 2001); ''Krinsky v. Doe 6'', {{cite web|url=http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/H030767.PDF |title=159 Cal. App. 4th 1154 (pdf) }}{{dead link|date=April 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} (2008).</ref>
Line 58: Line 74:


The use and selection of pseudonyms is not standardized in U.S. courts and the practice itself is opposed on legal grounds by some and was rare prior to 1969.
The use and selection of pseudonyms is not standardized in U.S. courts and the practice itself is opposed on legal grounds by some and was rare prior to 1969.
:"...Currently there are no court rules about pseudonym use. The rules of civil procedure,...are silent on the matter..." "Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) reads, '...In the complaint, the title of the action shall include the names of all the parties . . . .' The rule contains no guidance as to what parties should do to keep their names confidential."<ref>{{cite web |author=Donald P. Balla |url=http://lawreview.law.uark.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ballaforweb.pdf |title=John Doe Is Alive and Well: Designing Pseudonym Use in American Courts |publisher=Arkansas Law Review |accessdate=4 January 2014}}</ref>
:"Currently there are no court rules about pseudonym use. The rules of civil procedure,...are silent on the matter..." "Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) reads, '...In the complaint, the title of the action shall include the names of all the parties . . . .' The rule contains no guidance as to what parties should do to keep their names confidential."<ref>{{cite web |author=Donald P. Balla |url=http://lawreview.law.uark.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ballaforweb.pdf |title=John Doe Is Alive and Well: Designing Pseudonym Use in American Courts |publisher=Arkansas Law Review |accessdate=4 January 2014}}</ref>
:"Prior to... 1969, only one Supreme Court case, three court of appeals' decisions, and one district court decision in the previous quarter-century featured an anonymous individual as the sole or lead plaintiff. Between 1969 and January 22, 1973, the date when the Supreme Court decided [[Roe v. Wade|Roe]] and [[Doe v. Bolton|Doe]], there were twenty-one district court and two court of appeals decisions featuring anonymous plaintiffs."<ref>{{cite web |last=Milani |first=Adam A. |url=https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&doctype=cite&docid=41+Wayne+L.+Rev.+1659&key=d76535e5079120df8de61ccdfa1ed478 |title=DOE V. ROE: AN ARGUMENT FOR DEFENDANT ANONYMITY WHEN A PSEUDONYMOUS PLAINTIFF ALLEGES A STIGMATIZING INTENTIONAL TORT |work=Lexisnexis.com |accessdate=18 February 2012}}</ref>
:"Prior to... 1969, only one Supreme Court case, three court of appeals' decisions, and one district court decision in the previous quarter-century featured an anonymous individual as the sole or lead plaintiff. Between 1969 and January 22, 1973, the date when the Supreme Court decided [[Roe v. Wade|Roe]] and [[Doe v. Bolton|Doe]], there were twenty-one district court and two court of appeals decisions featuring anonymous plaintiffs."<ref>{{cite web |last=Milani |first=Adam A. |url=https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&doctype=cite&docid=41+Wayne+L.+Rev.+1659&key=d76535e5079120df8de61ccdfa1ed478 |title=DOE V. ROE: AN ARGUMENT FOR DEFENDANT ANONYMITY WHEN A PSEUDONYMOUS PLAINTIFF ALLEGES A STIGMATIZING INTENTIONAL TORT |work=Lexisnexis.com |accessdate=18 February 2012}}</ref>
*On March 10, 2015, HTG Capital Partners LLC filed a federal lawsuit against unnamed “spoofers,” which the suit referred to as John Doe(s), in the hopes of getting a judge to force the [[Chicago Mercantile Exchange]] to reveal the names of the firms. HTG said it had found evidence of thousands of such manipulations over 2013 and 2014."<ref>{{cite web |author= Bradely Hope |url= http://on.wsj.com/1HKj7CK |title=Was ‘John Doe’ Manipulating Treasury Futures? New Lawsuit Says Yes.}}</ref>
*On March 10, 2015, HTG Capital Partners LLC filed a federal lawsuit against unnamed “spoofers,” which the suit referred to as John Doe(s), in the hopes of getting a judge to force the [[Chicago Mercantile Exchange]] to reveal the names of the firms. HTG said it had found evidence of thousands of such manipulations over 2013 and 2014."<ref>{{cite web |author= Bradely Hope |url= http://on.wsj.com/1HKj7CK |title=Was ‘John Doe’ Manipulating Treasury Futures? New Lawsuit Says Yes.}}</ref>
*In November 2016, a woman only identified as "Jane Doe" abandoned plans to go public about allegedly being raped by [[Donald Trump]].<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/02/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit-13-year-old-cancels-public-event|title=Woman accusing Trump of raping her at 13 cancels her plan to go public|last=Carroll|first=Rory|date=3 November 2016|work=[[The Guardian]]|accessdate=16 October 2017}}</ref>
*In November 2016, a woman only identified as "Jane Doe" abandoned plans to go public about allegedly being raped by [[Donald Trump]].<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/02/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit-13-year-old-cancels-public-event|title=Woman accusing Trump of raping her at 13 cancels her plan to go public|last=Carroll|first=Rory|date=3 November 2016|work=[[The Guardian]]|accessdate=16 October 2017}}</ref>
*In October 2017, an unidentified minor Jane Doe detained by [[U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement]] sued to enjoin the government from obstructing her access to abortion in [[Garza v. Hargan]].
*In October 2017, an unidentified minor Jane Doe detained by [[U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement]] sued to enjoin the government from obstructing her access to abortion in [[Garza v. Hargan]].

==Other variants==
In addition to Doe and Roe, other "_oe" names have been used when more than two unknown or unidentified persons are named in U.S. court proceedings, ''e.g.'', ''Poe v. Snyder'', 834 F.Supp.2d 721 (W. D. Mich. 2011),<ref>{{cite web |title=Poe v. Snyder|url=http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020111228719|website=www.leagle.com}}</ref> whose full style is

:''Jane Poe, John Doe, Richard Roe, Robert Roe, Mark Moe, Larry Loe, Degage Ministries, and Mel Trotter Ministries, Plaintiffs, v. Rick Snyder, Governor of the State of Michigan, Bill Schuette, Attorney General of the State of Michigan, Kriste Etue, Director of the Michigan State Police, William Forsyth, Kent County Prosecutor, in their official capacities, Defendants'';

and ''Friedman v. Ferguson'', No. 87-3758, unpublished disposition, 850 F.2d 689 (4th Cir., 29 June 1988),<ref>{{cite web |title=''Friedman v. Ferguson'' |url=http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/850/689/3734/ |website=Law.justia.com}}</ref> whose full style is
:''Wilbur H. Friedman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Thomas B. FERGUSON, Director, Department of Animal Control, a State Actor, In His Official and Individual Capacities; Brett Boe; Carla Coe; Donna Doe; Frank Foe; Grace Goe; Harry Hoe; State Actors, Advisors To Defendant Ferguson, In Their Official and Individual Capacities (identities currently unknown); Marta Moe; Norma Noe; Paula Poe; Ralph Roe; Sammy Soe; Tommy Toe; Private Individuals Who Conspired With the Foregoing State Actors (identities currently unknown); Roger W. Galvin, Chairman, Animal Matters Hearing Board; Vince Voe; William Woe; Xerxes Xoe; Members of the Animal Matters Hearing Board, State Actors, In Their Official and Individual Capacities (identities currently unknown), Defendants-Appellees''.<ref>Note that the plaintiff-appellant Friedman represented himself, so his use of fictitious names may not reflect legal custom.</ref>

In a lawsuit in the UK about the publication of D.H. Lawrence's novel "Lady Chatterley's Lover" the 'average person' was referred to as "[[the man on the Clapham omnibus]]". Parallels in other cultures are in France "Monsieur Brun", in Italy "Signor Rossi", in India "Ashok Kumar".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/article3258958.ece |title='Kolaveri' against piracy |author=R Balaji |newspaper=The Hindu Business Line |date=29 March 2012}}</ref>


==See also==
==See also==
{{div col}}
{{div col}}
* [[Tommy Atkins]]
* [[Joe Bloggs]]
* [[Israel Israeli]]
* [[Israel Israeli]]
* [[Average Joe]]
* [[Average Joe]]
* [[Rudolf Lingens]]
* [[Rudolf Lingens]]
* [[John Q. Public]]
* [[Joe Shmoe]]
* [[Joe Shmoe]]
* [[Tom, Dick and Harry]]
* [[Tom, Dick and Harry]]
* [[Mister X (disambiguation)|Mr. X]]
* [[Mister X (disambiguation)|Mr. X]]
* [[Blackacre]]
* [[Blackacre]]
* ''[[Meet John Doe]]''
* [[Multiple-use name]]
* [[Multiple-use name]]
* [[Nomen nescio]]
* [[Nomen nescio]]
* [[Placeholder name]]s
* [[Planet X]]
* [[Foo]]
* [[Foo]]
{{div col end}}
{{div col end}}

Revision as of 09:03, 13 November 2017

"John Doe" , "John Roe" or "Richard Roe" (for men), "Jane Doe" or "Jane Roe" (for women), and "Baby Doe", "Janie Doe" or "Johnny Doe" (for children), or just "Doe" or "Roe" are multiple-use names that have two distinct usages. Firstly, and especially in the United States, Canada and Ireland, they may refer to an unidentified person, or a party in a legal action whose identity is being withheld officially.[1] [2] In the context of law enforcement in the United States, such names are often used in to refer to a corpse, whose identity is unknown or unconfirmed. Secondly, such names are also often used to refer to a hypothetical "everyman" in other contexts, in a manner similar to "John Q. Public" or "Joe Public".

In other English-speaking countries, unique placeholder names, numbers and/or codenames have become more often used in the context of police investigations. This has included the United Kingdom, where usage of "John Doe" originated during the Middle Ages. However, the legal term John Doe injunction (or John Doe Order),[3] has survived in English law and other legal systems influenced by it. Other names used informally such as "Joe Bloggs" or "John Smith" have sometimes been informally used as placeholders for an everyman in the UK, Australia and New Zealand, such names are seldom used in legal or police circles in the same sense as John Doe.

Well-known legal cases named after placeholders include:

  • the landmark 1973 US Supreme Court decision regarding abortion: Roe v. Wade (1973) and;
  • the civil cases McKeogh v. John Doe (Ireland; 2012) and Uber Technologies, Inc. v. Doe I (California; 2015).[2][4]

Use of "John Doe" in the sense of an everyman, includes:

History

Under the legal terminology of Ancient Rome, the names "Numerius Negidius" and "Aulus Agerius" were used in relation to hypothetical defendants and plaintiffs.

The name "John Doe" (or "John Doo"), "Richard Roe," along with "John Roe", were regularly invoked in English legal instruments to satisfy technical requirements governing standing and jurisdiction, beginning perhaps as early as the reign of England's King Edward III (1327–1377).[5] Other fictitious names for a person involved in litigation in medieval English law were "John Noakes" (or "Nokes") and "John-a-Stiles" (or "John Stiles").[6]

The Oxford English Dictionary states that John Doe is "the name given to the fictitious lessee of the plaintiff, in the (now obsolete in the UK) mixed action of ejectment, the fictitious defendant being called Richard Roe".

This usage is mocked in the 1834 English song "John Doe and Richard Roe":

Two giants live in Britain's land,
John Doe and Richard Roe,
Who always travel hand in hand,
John Doe and Richard Roe.
Their fee-faw-fum's an ancient plan
To smell the purse of an Englishman,
And, 'ecod, they'll suck it all they can,
John Doe and Richard Roe ...[7]

This particular use became obsolete in the UK in 1852:

As is well known, the device of involving real people as notional lessees and ejectors was used to enable freeholders to sue the real ejectors. These were then replaced by the fictional characters John Doe and Richard Roe. Eventually the medieval remedies were (mostly) abolished by the Real Property Limitation Act of 1833; the fictional characters of John Doe and Richard Roe by the Common Law Procedure Act 1852; and the forms of action themselves by the Judicature Acts 1873–75."
Secretary of State for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Respondent) v Meier and another(FC) (Appellant) and others and another (FC)(Appellant) and another (2009).[8]

In the UK, usage of "John Doe" survives mainly in the form of John Doe Injunction or John Doe Order (see above).

8.02 If an unknown person has possession of the confidential personal information and is threatening to disclose it, a 'John Doe' injunction may be sought against that person. The first time this form of injunction was used since 1852 in the United Kingdom was in 2005 when lawyers acting for JK Rowling and her publishers obtained an interim order against an unidentified person who had offered to sell chapters of a stolen copy of an unpublished Harry Potter novel to the media.[9]

Unlike the United States, the name "John Doe" does not actually appear in the formal name of the case, for example: X & Y v Persons Unknown [2007] HRLR 4.[10]

Well-known cases of unidentified corpses include "Cali Doe" (1979) and "Princess Doe" (1982). The baby victim in a 2001 murder case in Kansas City, Missouri, was referred to as Precious Doe.[11]

In 2009, the New York Times reported the difficulties and unwanted attention experienced by a man actually named John Doe, who had often been suspected of using a pseudonym. He had been questioned repeatedly by airport security staff and suspected of being an incognito celebrity.[12]

Other variants

In cases where a large number of unidentified individuals are mentioned, numbers may be appended, such as "Doe #2" or "Doe II". Operation Delego (2009), whbich targeted an international child sexual abuse ring, cited 21 numbered "John Does", as well as well as other people known by the surnames "Doe", "Roe", and "Poe".

"John Stiles", "Richard Miles" have been used for the third and fourth participants in an action. "Mary Major" has been used in some federal cases in the US.[13] "James Doe" and "Judy Doe" are among other common variants.

Less often, other surnames ending in -oe have been used when more than two unknown or unidentified persons are named in U.S. court proceedings, e.g., Poe v. Snyder, 834 F.Supp.2d 721 (W. D. Mich. 2011),[14] whose full style is

  • Jane Poe, John Doe, Richard Roe, Robert Roe, Mark Moe, Larry Loe, Degage Ministries, and Mel Trotter Ministries, Plaintiffs, v. Rick Snyder, Governor of the State of Michigan, Bill Schuette, Attorney General of the State of Michigan, Kriste Etue, Director of the Michigan State Police, William Forsyth, Kent County Prosecutor, in their official capacities, Defendants and;
  • Friedman v. Ferguson, No. 87-3758, unpublished disposition, 850 F.2d 689 (4th Cir., 29 June 1988),[15] whose full style is
Wilbur H. Friedman, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Thomas B. FERGUSON, Director, Department of Animal Control, a State Actor, In His Official and Individual Capacities; Brett Boe; Carla Coe; Donna Doe; Frank Foe; Grace Goe; Harry Hoe; State Actors, Advisors To Defendant Ferguson, In Their Official and Individual Capacities (identities currently unknown); Marta Moe; Norma Noe; Paula Poe; Ralph Roe; Sammy Soe; Tommy Toe; Private Individuals Who Conspired With the Foregoing State Actors (identities currently unknown); Roger W. Galvin, Chairman, Animal Matters Hearing Board; Vince Voe; William Woe; Xerxes Xoe; Members of the Animal Matters Hearing Board, State Actors, In Their Official and Individual Capacities (identities currently unknown), Defendants-Appellees.[16]

Parallels in other countries include:

Since 1903 a hypothetical "ordinary and reasonable person" has often been known, in the legal parlance of the UK and other Commonwealth countries as "the man on the Clapham omnibus".[18][19]

Famous court cases

The use and selection of pseudonyms is not standardized in U.S. courts and the practice itself is opposed on legal grounds by some and was rare prior to 1969.

"Currently there are no court rules about pseudonym use. The rules of civil procedure,...are silent on the matter..." "Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) reads, '...In the complaint, the title of the action shall include the names of all the parties . . . .' The rule contains no guidance as to what parties should do to keep their names confidential."[24]
"Prior to... 1969, only one Supreme Court case, three court of appeals' decisions, and one district court decision in the previous quarter-century featured an anonymous individual as the sole or lead plaintiff. Between 1969 and January 22, 1973, the date when the Supreme Court decided Roe and Doe, there were twenty-one district court and two court of appeals decisions featuring anonymous plaintiffs."[25]
  • On March 10, 2015, HTG Capital Partners LLC filed a federal lawsuit against unnamed “spoofers,” which the suit referred to as John Doe(s), in the hopes of getting a judge to force the Chicago Mercantile Exchange to reveal the names of the firms. HTG said it had found evidence of thousands of such manipulations over 2013 and 2014."[26]
  • In November 2016, a woman only identified as "Jane Doe" abandoned plans to go public about allegedly being raped by Donald Trump.[27]
  • In October 2017, an unidentified minor Jane Doe detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement sued to enjoin the government from obstructing her access to abortion in Garza v. Hargan.

See also

References

  1. ^ "Twitched Indictment" (PDF). Justice.gov. Retrieved 2 October 2012.
  2. ^ a b McKeogh v. John Doe
  3. ^ "Obtaining a John Doe order". PressGazette. Retrieved 2 October 2012.
  4. ^ "Uber Technologies, Inc. v. Doe I". Justia Dockets & Filings.
  5. ^ What's In A Name. Merriam-Webster. 1996. ISBN 978-0-87779-613-8.[page needed]
  6. ^ "World Wide Words – John DoeZ". Worldwidewords.org. Retrieved 2 October 2012.
  7. ^ The Universal Songster: Or, Museum of Mirth: Forming the Most Complete, Extensive, and Valuable Collection of Ancient and Modern Songs in the English Language, with a Copious and Classified Index, Volume 1. London: Jones and Company. 1827. p. 378. Retrieved 18 September 2015.
  8. ^ "Supreme Court Decided Cases (pdf)" (PDF). Supremecourt.gov.uk. Retrieved 2 October 2012.
  9. ^ "THE LAW OF PROFESSIONAL-CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY: Regulating the Disclosure of Confidential Personal Information, Update". Uea.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 7 July 2003.
  10. ^ "Uncorrected Evidence 75". Publications.parliament.uk. 18 February 2009. Retrieved 2 October 2012.
  11. ^ Goldblatt, Jeff (8 August 2002). "Slain Mystery Girl Brings Community Together". FOX News Network. Retrieved 30 June 2006.
  12. ^ Alison Leigh Cowan (29 July 2009). "Meet John Doe. No, really!". The New York Times. Retrieved 5 August 2009.
  13. ^ Quinion M (15 March 2003). "John Doe". World Wide Words. Retrieved 26 November 2008.
  14. ^ "Poe v. Snyder". www.leagle.com.
  15. ^ "Friedman v. Ferguson". Law.justia.com.
  16. ^ Note that the plaintiff-appellant Friedman represented himself, so his use of fictitious names may not reflect legal custom.
  17. ^ R Balaji (29 March 2012). "'Kolaveri' against piracy". The Hindu Business Line.
  18. ^ McQuire v Western Morning News [1903] 2 K.B. 100 at 109 per Collins MR.
  19. ^ Room, Richard, ed. (1996), Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable (15th ed.), Cassell, p. 761, ISBN 0062701339
  20. ^ "Who is JANE DOE?". Walnet.org. Retrieved 2 October 2012.
  21. ^ See, for example, Dendrite International, Inc. v. Doe, "775 A.2d 756". (N.J. App. Div. 2001); Krinsky v. Doe 6, "159 Cal. App. 4th 1154 (pdf)" (PDF).[permanent dead link] (2008).
  22. ^ Nikhil Pahwa. "Update: Files Sharing Sites Blocked In India Because Reliance BIG Pictures Got A Court Order". MediaNama. Retrieved 2 October 2012.
  23. ^ "'John Doe Order' for BODYGUARD to curb its piracy". Bollywoodtrade.com. 29 August 2011.
  24. ^ Donald P. Balla. "John Doe Is Alive and Well: Designing Pseudonym Use in American Courts" (PDF). Arkansas Law Review. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
  25. ^ Milani, Adam A. "DOE V. ROE: AN ARGUMENT FOR DEFENDANT ANONYMITY WHEN A PSEUDONYMOUS PLAINTIFF ALLEGES A STIGMATIZING INTENTIONAL TORT". Lexisnexis.com. Retrieved 18 February 2012.
  26. ^ Bradely Hope. "Was 'John Doe' Manipulating Treasury Futures? New Lawsuit Says Yes".
  27. ^ Carroll, Rory (3 November 2016). "Woman accusing Trump of raping her at 13 cancels her plan to go public". The Guardian. Retrieved 16 October 2017.