W.N.J. v. Yocom

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that nunc pro tunc order “cannot -9- be used to rewrite history”
• finding that entry of nunc pro tunc order granting permission to file under pseudonym “can not cure the failure to secure permission at filing”
• holding nunc pro tunc orders cannot be used to rewrite history
• dismissing case for lack of jurisdiction because “plaintiffs failed to request permission from the district court before proceeding anonymously”
• noting that “[s]ignificant privacy interests, such as plaintiffs’ interest in keeping their sexual habits from public scrutiny,” may constitute a case where a party may proceed under a pseudonym but not deciding the issue because it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction
• noting that “[s]ignificant privacy interests, such as plaintiffs’ interest in keeping their sexual habits from public scrutiny,” may constitute a case where a party may proceed under a pseudonym but not deciding the issue because it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).