And for bonus points, was the player a child?
I never have, and as far as I know that was never a thing that ever happened in Springfield, Illinois between 1982 (when I learned to play chess) and 2014 (when I moved away).
I don’t recall ever seeing it and hearing about it happening in the 80s in New Jersey.
At the states and in the club, for fun, I did take on up to 5 opponents at once, but it was speed chess. The 5 at once one, we had 5 minutes each. The boards were set up in a U so I could just pivot. I won 4 out 5, so not bad. Please note, I was a mediocre player, I never got to even a 1700 rating. But I was really good at speed chess. No ratings or glory for that though.
Blindfolded simul? No.
As the guy that ran an elementary-level chess club for a few years, we brought in an outside coach (NM-level, I believe) and he could easily beat all of our players simultaneously - which he did many times. He also beat our stronger players blindfolded (well, facing away from the board) multiple times. But never both at the same time.
I have played blindfolded and I have played small simuls, but I have never played a blindfolded simul. This was all informal and just fun handicaps to apply when playing with new players. (I wouldn’t hold up very long playing blindfolded against anyone with notable chess experience.)
I’m going to try and get @glee’s attention.
He’s was a chess teacher.
Did somebody call? 
Blindfold chess is hard - really hard!
When I was rated over 2200 ELO, I could just manage two games (one with White and one with Black..) I certainly wouldn’t have played up to my rating in either.
Some snippets…
- it’s pretty tiring and I didn’t sleep well that night
- world class players have managed around 30 such games
- playing chess at all involves visualising ahead (so the beginning of blindfold chess)
- if the other players conspire, they can make it incredibly difficult*
*they play similar openings, but with slight variations
Not blindfolded, but I did play in a simultaneous match against a master when I was around 12 years old. He clobbered me, or course; but it gives me a Morphy Number of 6.
Ooooh - I hadn’t heard of that in chess (I assume it comes from Kevin Bacon number?)
From the Wiki page below, I’ve played several players* with a Morphy number of 3, so I guess I have one of 4. 
*Owen Hindle, Jonathan Penrose, Stewart Reuben
More likely from Erdös number (which Kevin Bacon number also comes from-- Erdös numbers were first defined when Bacon himself was only 11 years old).
Not a lot 3s left alive, I would think, so your 4 is pretty low. Morphy died in 1884.
The exhibition I took part in was against Viktors Pupols. I looked him up on Wikipedia and it mentions that he beat Bobby Fisher in a junior tournament in 1955. Fisher had a Morphy Number of 4; that makes Pupols a 5, and me a 6.
Unless he also played someone with an even lower number. Folks always go for the big, high-profile links in these things, and often miss better connections.
True, although I don’t know if there’s any place to do the research to find out. Considering how long since Morphy died, I thought being a 6 was unusually low. I suppose I could play @glee and be a 5.
I’ve played some training games on this board - so there are Dopers who are a 5 already! 
@glee are you willing to reveal your name?
Why would you like to know?!
I could play one of them and be a 6, but I’m already a 6.
Honestly, the actual number doesn’t matter. I’ve never acted in a movie, or published a scientific paper, so Morphy is the first of these sort of things where I actually have a number.
See who you are, whom you’ve played, your ELO, your tournament history, that sort of thing. Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the USCF have a database of all titled players?
“I got my butt handed to me by Joe Smith, an IM from California. He drew against Fischer in a simul in 1978…”
Pretty sure glee is not in the USCF.
FIDE has a database of all titled players, but glee does not owe anyone a public breach of his board anonymity if he’d prefer not to. I think his bonafides are reasonably well-established by his long history of participation in these topics on the board.
ETA: Not yelling at you by the way, I understand the curiosity. Just that it is a little bit of an ask that many people are going to be a little uncomfortable with. I would be despite the fact that there are a couple of people here who I’ve met in RL.
I seem to have at most Morphy number 5 (not via @glee). This motivated me to reconsider my Bacon number to see if I can seek the title of lowest Erdös-Bacon-Morphy number on the board. If I allow wiggle room on my Bacon number on-ramp (on-screen appearance of any sort; otherwise, I can’t get into the game at all!), then I’m at Erdös-Bacon-Morphy of 12. 
I think that’s why @HeyHomie phrased it as “are you willing to reveal”. “No” is a perfectly reasonable answer to that question.
Well, having an Erdös number at all is relatively rare (though considerably less so, among the population of this board), and likewise having a Bacon number, and they’re probably mostly uncorrelated, so even having an Erdös-Bacon number at all is quite uncommon. Having an Erdös-Bacon-Morphy number must be even less common, though Morphy numbers are much less rare and probably correlated with having an Erdös number.
Of those that do have such a numbers, having a 4 (on average) is probably relatively uncommon, so I would venture to guess that you are, in fact, the board’s record-holder for that combined number.