This story by Nora Doyle-Burr was published by the Valley News on May 15.
HANOVER — Dartmouth College is contesting the use of pseudonyms in the $70 million class-action lawsuit that alleges that college administrators turned a blind eye to sexual misconduct by three former professors in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences.
In its more recent response, filed on Tuesday in federal court in Concord, Dartmouth contends that its ability to defend itself against the plaintiffs’ charges is compromised by the use of pseudonyms and that this use is particularly unfair “given Plaintiffs’ use of publicity as a sword.”
The filing comes in response to an amended lawsuit that the plaintiffs filed earlier this month which added two new plaintiffs, Jane Doe 2 and Jane Doe 3, bringing the total to nine.
The suit alleges that college administrators ignored sexual harassment and assault for more than 16 years, despite knowing about the alleged misconduct of the now-former professors — Todd Heatherton, William Kelley and Paul Whalen. The professors retired or resigned last summer before the college could fire them following internal investigations that resulted in recommendations that they be terminated.
Both of the new plaintiffs have filed court motions seeking anonymity “due to the sensitive nature of the acts perpetrated upon them and to mitigate against additional extreme emotional distress that would result in publicly identifying them,” their filing said.
Six of the former students are named in the lawsuit, while another of the original plaintiffs is known as Jane Doe 1.
Dartmouth, in its opposition, contends that the sensitive nature of some of the plaintiffs’ allegations, which include sexual assault, is not “necessarily sufficient” to allow them to proceed under a pseudonym.
Instead, Dartmouth said, “Plaintiffs must show actual and reasonable risk of severe retaliation or other significant harm.”
In addition, Dartmouth points out that the plaintiffs are not bringing only their individual claims, but they are also bringing claims on behalf of an entire class.
“Indeed, the very public nature of what a class representative is supposed to do — represent and stand in the place of other plaintiffs — is at odds with the request to remain anonymous,” Dartmouth said in its filing.
The college said the request for anonymity is especially “unfair” given that the six plaintiffs who are not using pseudonyms have made efforts to publicize the case and that the complaint specifically accuses members of the Dartmouth faculty and administration “of wrongdoing, despite the fact that Dartmouth (and the individuals) vigorously dispute any suggestion that they did anything wrong, much less contributed to the core allegations that underlie Plaintiffs’ claims.”
Jamie Moss, a spokesman for Sanford Heisler Sharp, the law firm representing the plaintiffs, declined comment via email on Wednesday.
“Our response will be set forth in the reply brief we submit in court,” Moss wrote.
