Guest
09-12-2003, 12:04 PM
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Writer963@aol.com (WriterP) wrote:
Can a plaintiff in a medical malpractice suit in Wisconsin file as a John Doe? Thanks.
Your queston doesn't make suffiently clear whether you are just
soliciting suggestions for how in theory or how mechanically a lawsuit
(whether or not one seeking to recover for alleged medical
malpractice) may be filed in some sort of anonymous form compared with
referring to any particular lawsuit for which there may be a
well-founded reason to proceed anonymously and so, in this sense, is
not meaninfully answerable, except to note:
On the one hand, that (read literally) it is an
apparently self-answering question; and
On the other hand, that the courts have the authority,
in the proper exercise of discretion in appropriate cases,
to allow the filing/prosecution of a lawsuit in anonymous
(and, perhaps, in otherwise "sealed") form, re. which
"appropriate" as here used is not, standing alone, that
the lawsuit is one to recover for alleged medical mal-
practice (although in such a lawsuit this necessarily
[if: obivously] will be one of the factors to be con-
sidered), but refers to all the lawsuit-specific facts
/circumstances said to require (and also those said
or would probably be said to contravene) a "John Doe"
form of prosecution.
Under either alternative -- i.e., regardless whether the plaintiff
responds to the "can?" literally and just styles the lawsuit as a
"John Doe" one and thereupon (as [yet all that] you ask) "file[s]" it
as such -- the real world answer (if plaintiff opted for the first
noted alternative, thus including what probably will occur after a
plaintiff whose birth- or married- or oherwise real-world name is not
"John Doe" has "file[d]" a lawsuit in "John Doe" form) will depend on
the (fact-specific) answers to this question (which, of course, you've
anticipated):
WHY (exactly) should plaintiff do and,
if challenged, be allowed to do this?
(Perhaps interestingly [maybe even: significantly?], not merely do you
choose in your posting not actually to address this question but your
failure to do so begs the related question whether the defendant[s]
would object to a "John Doe" form of lawsuit compared with perhaps
just acquiescing and, hence, the question whether the "can?" would be
facilitated if defendant[s] were to do so as, meanwhile, you do not
seem to be asking whether plaintiff would sue and "name" the
defendant[s] in "John Doe" or "['xyz' hospital]" fashion, too).
Can a plaintiff in a medical malpractice suit in Wisconsin file as a John Doe? Thanks.
Your queston doesn't make suffiently clear whether you are just
soliciting suggestions for how in theory or how mechanically a lawsuit
(whether or not one seeking to recover for alleged medical
malpractice) may be filed in some sort of anonymous form compared with
referring to any particular lawsuit for which there may be a
well-founded reason to proceed anonymously and so, in this sense, is
not meaninfully answerable, except to note:
On the one hand, that (read literally) it is an
apparently self-answering question; and
On the other hand, that the courts have the authority,
in the proper exercise of discretion in appropriate cases,
to allow the filing/prosecution of a lawsuit in anonymous
(and, perhaps, in otherwise "sealed") form, re. which
"appropriate" as here used is not, standing alone, that
the lawsuit is one to recover for alleged medical mal-
practice (although in such a lawsuit this necessarily
[if: obivously] will be one of the factors to be con-
sidered), but refers to all the lawsuit-specific facts
/circumstances said to require (and also those said
or would probably be said to contravene) a "John Doe"
form of prosecution.
Under either alternative -- i.e., regardless whether the plaintiff
responds to the "can?" literally and just styles the lawsuit as a
"John Doe" one and thereupon (as [yet all that] you ask) "file[s]" it
as such -- the real world answer (if plaintiff opted for the first
noted alternative, thus including what probably will occur after a
plaintiff whose birth- or married- or oherwise real-world name is not
"John Doe" has "file[d]" a lawsuit in "John Doe" form) will depend on
the (fact-specific) answers to this question (which, of course, you've
anticipated):
WHY (exactly) should plaintiff do and,
if challenged, be allowed to do this?
(Perhaps interestingly [maybe even: significantly?], not merely do you
choose in your posting not actually to address this question but your
failure to do so begs the related question whether the defendant[s]
would object to a "John Doe" form of lawsuit compared with perhaps
just acquiescing and, hence, the question whether the "can?" would be
facilitated if defendant[s] were to do so as, meanwhile, you do not
seem to be asking whether plaintiff would sue and "name" the
defendant[s] in "John Doe" or "['xyz' hospital]" fashion, too).
