Doe v. Delta Airlines Inc., 672 F. App'x 48

Jane Doe sued Delta Airlines alleging, among other claims, false arrest and defamation arising from an incident in which Delta employees prevented her from boarding a flight on the basis that she was intoxicated.
Doe filed under a pseudonym; District Court initially allowed pseudonymous filing but later required disclosure before trial.
Delta sought discovery of Doe’s medical records; the District Court ordered production, finding Doe’s medical condition and medications were at issue given intoxication allegations.
Doe resisted production on grounds of New York’s physician‑patient privilege and failed to timely comply with multiple discovery orders; the District Court imposed monetary sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37.
Delta moved for summary judgment on all claims; the District Court granted summary judgment on the false arrest claim (but not on battery) and later dismissed Doe’s remaining claim with prejudice after she declined to proceed by name.
Doe appealed the orders requiring medical record production, the Rule 37 monetary sanctions, the grant of summary judgment on false arrest, and the denial of her request to proceed anonymously.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Doe’s medical records were protected by physician‑patient privilege and not waived	Doe: privilege under N.Y. law protects records; she did not put medical condition at issue	Delta: Doe’s intoxication claims put her medical history and medications at issue, so privilege waived	Court: Waiver; disclosure ordered because medical condition was material to liability and damages
Whether monetary sanctions under Rule 37 were improper	Doe: refusal justified by vigorous assertion of privilege, so sanctions inappropriate	Delta: Doe willfully disobeyed multiple court orders and delayed production	Court: Sanctions upheld; noncompliance was willful, prolonged, warned, and lesser sanctions ineffective
Whether Delta is entitled to summary judgment on false arrest claim	Doe: factual dispute whether Delta procured or requested her arrest	Delta: no non‑speculative evidence that Delta requested arrest; arrest was officer’s act	Court: Summary judgment for Delta affirmed; no evidence Delta procured arrest
Whether Doe may proceed to trial anonymously	Doe: interest in avoiding professional embarrassment and financial harm justifies pseudonym	Delta: public interest and prejudice defending against anonymous plaintiff require disclosure	Court: Denial affirmed; public scrutiny and defendant prejudice outweigh Doe’s interest

In re Sims, 534 F.3d 117 (2d Cir.) (standard for abuse of discretion review on privilege waiver)
In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 219 F.3d 175 (2d Cir.) (privilege waiver principles)
Dillenbeck v. Hess, 73 N.Y.2d 278 (N.Y. 1989) (existence of New York physician‑patient privilege)
People v. Wilkins, 65 N.Y.2d 172 (N.Y. 1985) (waiver where medical condition is placed at issue)
Koump v. Smith, 25 N.Y.2d 287 (N.Y. 1969) (same)
Wolters Kluwer Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Scivantage, 564 F.3d 110 (2d Cir.) (abuse of discretion review for sanctions)
Residential Funding Corp. v. DeGeorge Fin. Corp., 306 F.3d 99 (2d Cir.) (district court discretion in fashioning discovery sanctions)
Agiwal v. Mid Island Mortg. Corp., 555 F.3d 298 (2d Cir.) (factors for Rule 37 sanctions)
Curley v. AMR Corp., 153 F.3d 5 (2d Cir.) (standard of review for summary judgment)
Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Wickline, 50 S.E.2d 387 (Va.) (definition of false imprisonment under Virginia law)
Winters v. Campbell, 137 S.E.2d 188 (Va.) (liability for procuring unlawful arrest)
Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185 (2d Cir.) (framework for deciding pseudonymous litigant requests)