No Pseudonymity in Ex-Professor's Sexual Harassment and Assault Lawsuit Against Norwich University |
Free Speech
Eugene Volokh | 12.24.2025 8:01 AM
From Doe v. Norwich University, decided last week by Washington County (Vermont) Superior Court Judge Daniel Richardson:
[Plaintiff seeks permission] to proceed in this case under [a] pseudonym …. She also seeks:
[3.] Entry of a permanent redaction/sealing order for:
[4.] Entry of a Protective order under V.R.C.P. 26(c) prohibiting disclosure or use sealed/confidential materials beyond this litigation.
In short, she proposes to litigate this case as a completely unidentified plaintiff against named defendants, who in addition will be subject to substantial limits on their free speech rights. She asserts in her motions and a supporting affidavit that doing so will avoid "[h]assessment [sic], doxxing, embarrassment, and professional repercussions" as well as "[i]rreparable emotional harm and exposure of sensitive facts to her minor children and their peers via internet/social media search." She asserts without analysis that there is no legitimate public interest in her identity….
To warrant a seal [under the Vermont Rules for Public Access to Court Records], the court must find "by clear and convincing evidence, that good cause and exceptional circumstances exist for the restriction of public access." Vt. R. Pub. Acc. Ct. Rec. 9(a)(5). And any seal must be........