Cornell seeks clearer exceptions to proposed order
Cornell UniversityUniversity, in a letter to the court
Cornell asks for clearer exceptions so an order would not interfere with its obligations or require it to restrict the speech of its students and employees.
“The exceptions set out in the proposed order are not sufficiently broad or sufficiently defined to address these concerns.”
Reporting
Where this statement fits
Diego Sarabia's lawyer seeks limits on statements in the Cornell civil case; Jane Doe's lawyer objects
James C. Knox, a lawyer for Diego Sarabia, one of the defendants in Jane Doe's civil lawsuit against Cornell University and others, asked a New York state court on October 9, 2026 to restrict what the parties and their lawyers say about the case outside court. He argues that publicity could prejudice potential jurors and that sensitive information could lead to threats and doxing. Thomas Giuffra, who represents Jane Doe, says the request is an attempt to silence his client and him. In an October 14 letter, Cornell asked the court not to enter the proposed order until its exceptions are clarified, and asked that protections extend to nonparty witnesses' identities. CNY Central reported that day that the court had not ruled on the request.
Source and context
Reporting
About this source
Matt Saffer quotes Cornell's request for clearer exceptions and protection of witnesses' privacy.
Before the quotation
Cornell's letter said the requested relief could be read to keep the university from meeting its obligations, or to require it to restrict the speech of its students, employees and community members.
After the quotation
Cornell said it welcomed discussion of an appropriate order but asked that the order not be entered as drafted until its limitations and exceptions are clarified. The same letter supported Jane Doe's application to proceed under a pseudonym and asked that protections extend to nonparty witnesses.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
Cornell objects to the current wording but is open to a revised order; its response is conditional rather than categorical.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseGiuffra says the request would silence Jane Doe
“The Defense is now attempting to silence me and Ms. Doe because we have been so successful in rebutting their ineffectual attempts to undermine her story”Read statement
Knox says Jane Doe's lawyer argued the merits in the media
“Since this action began, Plaintiff's counsel has repeatedly addressed the merits through widely disseminated media statements”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Cornell seeks clearer exceptions to proposed order
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/5755-cornell-asks-for-clearer-exceptions-so-an-order
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Cornell seeks clearer exceptions to proposed order". First published: 2026-10-15. Last updated: 2026-10-15. https://disputeindex.com/events/5755-cornell-asks-for-clearer-exceptions-so-an-order