2001), is a New Jersey Superior Court case in which Dendrite International, Inc., a purveyor of computer software used in the pharmaceutical industry, brought a John Doe lawsuit against individuals who had anonymously posted criticisms of the company on a Yahoo message board.
[8] In November 2000, the trial judge granted the company's motion to conduct limited discovery to ascertain the identities of Does No.
The panel cited cases ruling that constitutional free speech protections extend to anonymous or pseudonymous comments made online, and stated that in order for Doe No.
3, the court set forth a five-prong test for judges to apply in future cases when deciding whether to compel disclosure of an anonymous poster's identity: (1) the plaintiff must make good faith efforts to notify the poster and give the poster a reasonable opportunity to respond; (2) the plaintiff must specifically identify the poster's allegedly actionable statements; (3) the complaint must set forth a prima facie cause of action; (4) the plaintiff must support each element of the claim with sufficient evidence; and (5) "the court must balance the defendant's First Amendment right of anonymous free speech against the strength of the prima facie case presented and the necessity for the disclosure of the anonymous defendant's identity.
The five prongs had been offered by an amicus brief by Paul Alan Levy from Public Citizen, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the ACLU of New Jersey.
[9] These guidelines build upon the summary judgment standard, but provide additional protection in that they allow the court to "balance" the defendant's rights against the strength of the plaintiff's prima facie case.