Doe v. Truthfinder LLC
4:25-cv-03187
D.S.C.Jul 2, 2025Background
- Plaintiff filed a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) lawsuit against Truthfinder, LLC for including expunged and misattributed criminal records in a consumer report provided to a prospective landlord.
- As a result, Plaintiff's housing application was denied, causing personal and financial harm.
- Plaintiff moved to proceed under a pseudonym to prevent further disclosure of expunged and inaccurate criminal records.
- Plaintiff argued that disclosure of his identity would perpetuate the harm the suit seeks to remedy and circumvent confidentiality protections under South Carolina law and the FCRA.
- Plaintiff agreed to disclose his identity to Defendant under a confidentiality stipulation or protective order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motion to proceed under pseudonym | Exposure would perpetuate privacy harm and violate confidentiality of expunged records | Not specified | Motion granted; pseudonym permitted |
| Privacy versus openness of proceedings | Anonymity needed due to sensitive nature and risk of reputational/economic harm | Not specified | Plaintiff's privacy outweighs openness |
| Prejudice to the defendant | Will disclose identity confidentially, so no unfairness to Defendant | Not specified | No unfair prejudice to Defendant |
| Public access to proceedings | Proceedings remain public; only Plaintiff’s name withheld | Not specified | Court records open, but Plaintiff anonymous |
Key Cases Cited
- Doe v. Public Citizen, 749 F.3d 246 (4th Cir. 2014) (anonymity is appropriate in limited circumstances to protect parties from serious harm)
- James v. Jacobson, 6 F.3d 233 (4th Cir. 1993) (sets out balancing test for pseudonymous litigation)