The names "John Doe" for males, "Jane Doe" or "Jane Roe" for females, or just "Doe" non-gender-specifically are used as placeholder names for a party whose true identity is unknown or must be withheld in a legal action, case, or discussion. The names are also used to refer to a corpse or hospital patient whose identity is unknown. This practice is widely used in the United States and Canada, but is rarely used in other English-speaking countries including the United Kingdom itself, from where the use of "John Doe" in a legal context originates. The name Joe Bloggs is used in the UK instead, as well as in Australia and New Zealand.
John Doe is sometimes used to refer to a typical male in other contexts as well, in a similar manner as John Q. Public, Joe Public or John Smith. For example, the first name listed on a form is often John Doe, along with a fictional address or other fictional information to provide an example of how to fill out the form. The name is also used frequently in popular culture, for example in the Frank Capra film Meet John Doe. John Doe was also the name of a 2002 American television series.
Similarly, a child or baby whose identity is unknown may be referred to as Baby Doe. A notorious murder case in Kansas City, Missouri referred to the baby victim as Precious Doe. Other unidentified female murder victims are Cali Doe and Princess Doe. Additional persons may be called James Doe, Judy Doe, etc. However, to avoid possible confusion, if two anonymous or unknown parties are cited in a specific case or action, the surnames Doe and Roe may be used simultaneously; for example, "John Doe v. Jane Roe". If several anonymous parties are referenced, they may simply be labelled John Doe #1, John Doe #2, etc. (the U.S. Operation Delego cited 21 (numbered) "John Doe"s) or labelled with other variants of Doe / Roe / Poe / etc. Other early alternatives such as John Stiles and Richard Miles are now rarely used, and Mary Major has been used in some American federal cases.
The Doe names are often, though not always, used for anonymous or unknown defendants. Another set of names often used for anonymous parties, particularly plaintiffs, are Richard Roe for males and Jane Roe for females (as in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court abortion decision Roe v. Wade).
Bearing the actual name John Doe can cause difficulty, such as being stopped by airport security or suspected of being an incognito celebrity.
The term is sometimes used in lawsuits in Ireland - see for example Keogh -v- John Doe 1 & Ors (2012) IEHC 95 (26 January 2012)
The name "John Doe", often spelled "Doo," along with "Richard Roe" or "Roo" were regularly invoked in English legal instruments to satisfy technical requirements governing standing and jurisdiction, beginning perhaps as early as the reign of England's King Edward III (1312–1377).
Other fictitious names for a person involved in litigation under English law were John-a-Noakes, or John Noakes/Nokes and John-a-Stiles/John Stiles.
The Oxford English Dictionary states that John Doe is "the name given to the fictitious lessee of the plaintiff, in the (now obsolete in the UK) mixed action of ejectment, the fictitious defendant being called Richard Roe".
This particular use became obsolete in the UK in 1852:
As is well known, the device of involving real people as notional lessees and ejectors was used to enable freeholders to sue the real ejectors. These were then replaced by the fictional characters John Doe and Richard Roe. Eventually the medieval remedies were (mostly) abolished by the Real Property Limitation Act of 1833; the fictional characters of John Doe and Richard Roe by the Common Law Procedure Act 1852; and the forms of action themselves by the Judicature Acts 1873-75."
Secretary of State for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Respondent) v Meier and another(FC) (Appellant) and others and another (FC)(Appellant) and another (2009).
"8.02 If an unknown person has possession of the confidential personal information and is threatening to disclose it, a 'John Doe' injunction may be sought against that person. The first time this form of injunction was used since 1852 in the United Kingdom was in 2005 when lawyers acting for JK Rowling and her publishers obtained an interim order against an unidentified person who had offered to sell chapters of a stolen copy of an unpublished Harry Potter novel to the media".
Unlike in the United States the name (John) Doe does not actually appear in the formal name of the case, for example: X & Y v Persons Unknown  HRLR 4.
Court cases 
- The landmark 1973 United States Supreme Court abortion case Roe v. Wade gets half of its name from Jane Roe, an anonymous plaintiff later revealed to be named Norma McCorvey.
- A Toronto woman, publicly known only as Jane Doe, waged an 11-year court battle against the Toronto Police Service after being raped in 1986, alleging that the police had used her as bait to catch the Balcony Rapist. She won the case in 1998, and was named Chatelaine's Woman of the Year that year. She published a book about her experience, The Story of Jane Doe: A Book about Rape, in 2003.
- A Doe subpoena is a tool of discovery that a plaintiff may use to seek the identity of an unknown defendant. Doe subpoenas are often served on online service providers and ISPs to obtain the identity of the author of an anonymous post.
- Serial killer Richard Laurence Marquette confessed to the murder of an unknown woman identified only as Jane Doe.
- File sharing websites were blocked in India on July 21, 2011 on some ISPs including Bharti Airtel, BSNL, and Reliance Communications, because Reliance BIG Pictures got a “John Doe” order from Delhi High Court allowing them to serve cease and desist notices on movie pirates pirating the film Singham. This allegedly brought down piracy of the film by 30%.
- On August 29, 2011 Reliance Entertainment procured a 'John Doe' order from the Delhi High Court to prevent the illegal broadcast or streaming of its upcoming film Bodyguard. This order gives protection to the intellectual property owner, Reliance Entertainment, from copyright violation by prospective anonymous offenders.
The use and selection of pseudonyms is not standardized in U.S. courts and the practice itself is opposed on legal grounds by some and was rare prior to 1969.
- "...Currently there are no court rules about pseudonym use. The rules of civil procedure,...are silent on the matter..." "Rule of Civil Procedure 10(a) reads, '...In the complaint, the title of the action shall include the names of all the parties . . . .' The rule contains no guidance as to what parties should do to keep their names confidential."
- "Prior to... 1969, only one Supreme Court case, three court of appeals' decisions, and one district court decision in the previous quarter-century featured an anonymous individual as the sole or lead plaintiff. Between 1969 and January 22, 1973, the date when the Supreme Court decided Roe and Doe, there were twenty-one district court and two court of appeals decisions featuring anonymous plaintiffs."
Other variants 
In addition to Doe and Roe, other "_oe" names have been used when more than two unknown or anonymous persons are referenced in U.S. court proceedings. e.g. Jane Poe,... v. Rick Snyder,... and Friedman v. Ferguson
In Indian courts, "John Doe" is sometimes called "Ashok Kumar".
See also 
- "Twitched Indictment". Justice.gov. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
- Goldblatt, Jeff (2002-08-08). "Slain Mystery Girl Brings Community Together". FOX News Network. Retrieved 2006-06-30.
- Quinion M (2003-03-15). "John Doe". World Wide Words. Retrieved 2008-11-26.
- Alison Leigh Cowan (2009-07-29). "Meet John Doe. No, really!". The New York Times. Retrieved 2009-08-05.
- What's In A Name. Merriam-Webster. 1996. ISBN 978-0-87779-613-8.
- "World Wide Words - John DoeZ". Worldwidewords.org. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
- "Supreme Court Decided Cases (pdf)". Supremecourt.gov.uk. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
- "Obtaining a John Doe order". PressGazette. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
- [dead link]
- "Uncorrected Evidence 75". Publications.parliament.uk. 2009-02-18. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
- "Who is JANE DOE?". Walnet.org. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
- See, e.g., Dendrite International, Inc. v. Doe, 775 A.2d 756 (N.J. App. Div. 2001); Krinsky v. Doe 6, 159 Cal. App. 4th 1154 (pdf) (2008).
- Nikhil Pahwa. "Update: Files Sharing Sites Blocked In India Because Reliance BIG Pictures Got A Court Order". MediaNama. Retrieved 2012-10-02.
- Balla, Donald P., "Pseudonym Use in American Courts" at Arkansas Law Review. Accessed 2012 February 18
- Milani, Adam A. ,"DOE V. ROE: AN ARGUMENT FOR DEFENDANT ANONYMITY WHEN A PSEUDONYMOUS PLAINTIFF ALLEGES A STIGMATIZING INTENTIONAL TORT" at lexisnexis.com. Accessed 2012 February 18
- Jane Poe,... v. Rick Snyder,... at mi.findacase.com
- Friedman v. Ferguson at law.justia.com
- ‘Kolaveri' against piracy by R Balaji. The Hindu Business Line. March 29, 2012