D.W. v. Grindr, LLC, 8:25-cv-01260

D.W., as executor of M.C.'s estate, brings suit against Grindr, LLC, after the murder of M.C., a 16-year-old who met her alleged killers through the Grindr app.
The complaint alleges Grindr’s failure to use reasonable age verification and other safety measures facilitated M.C.’s death.
Plaintiff filed, and amended, the complaint anonymously, seeking permission for D.W., M.C., and survivors to proceed without disclosing identities.
Substantial details and identities related to this case have already been disclosed in national media coverage and public state court proceedings.
Defendant Grindr has not yet appeared in the case; this order addresses only the anonymity motion.
The court addresses whether the strong presumptions in favor of public judicial proceedings should yield to privacy concerns here.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plaintiff and related parties can proceed anonymously	Disclosure risks further harm and stigmatization, involves minor’s sexuality, and threatens physical harm or harassment.	Not briefed; Defendant not yet appeared.	Denied; privacy interests (especially of deceased) do not outweigh presumption of openness.

Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d 320 (11th Cir. 1992) (establishes presumption in favor of openness in judicial proceedings and the rarity of permitting anonymity)
Plaintiff B v. Francis, 631 F.3d 1310 (11th Cir. 2011) (enumerates factors for determining when anonymity overrides public interest)
In re: Chiquita Brands Int’l, Inc., 965 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir. 2020) (reaffirms strong presumption of openness, only rarely outweighed by privacy interests)
S. Methodist Univ. Ass’n of Women L. Students v. Wynne & Jaffe, 599 F.2d 707 (5th Cir. 1979) (distinguishes matters of "utmost intimacy" for anonymity rulings)