State v. A.M.G.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that order dismissing action for failure to include plaintiffs’ names but giving leave to amend complaint is immediately appealable under collateral order doctrine
• noting that \complaining employees are more effectively protected from retaliation by concealing their identities\ than by relying on legal anti-retaliation remedies
• noting that \complaining employees are more effectively protected from retaliation by concealing their identities\ than by relying on legal anti-retaliation remedies
• finding that “at present defendants suffer no 20 || prejudice by not knowing the names of plaintiffs.”
• explaining that a court must determine whether plaintiffs’ need for 18 anonymity outweighed the prejudice to defendants and the public’s interest
• holding that 12 when determining whether rare circumstances justify use of a pseudonym, courts 13 consider whether (1) the party’s need for anonymity outweighs (2) the prejudice to the 14 opposing party and (3) the public’s interest in knowing the party’s identity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).