Federal Judge: Alleged Harassment Survivor Can Keep Using Her Initials in Court

EEOC v. Genesh, Inc., No. 24-2445-DDC-ADM (D. Kan. July 7, 2025)
 
What happened? A Burger King supervisor allegedly groomed and sexually assaulted an employee when she was 15. She and the EEOC are now suing the restaurant’s owner for sexual harassment. The young woman recently turned 18, so the normal rule would reveal her full name in all future filings.

The ruling: Judge Angel Mitchell said the plaintiff may continue as “L.Z.”—even though she is now an adult—because:
 1. Highly sensitive subject. Sexual abuse of a minor is “exceptional,” and courts routinely       shield identities in such cases.
 2. Risk of further harm. Public exposure could amplify the very emotional injuries the suit seeks to address.
 3. Little public need. The defendant already knows who she is, and open-court principles are satisfied by revealing the facts, not the victim’s name.

The court left open whether anonymity should continue if the case reaches a jury trial, but for all pre-trial stages, L.Z. stays anonymous.

Why it matters: Victims can still pursue justice without losing control over their privacy—especially when the alleged misconduct happened during childhood.