Notre Dame rector files defamation suit against online posters of anonymous abuse allegations
Former University of Notre Dame residence rector Elizabeth Greenop filed a defamation and false-light lawsuit against anonymous online posters who accused her of sexual abuse. Greenop is seeking subpoenas to identify 10 defendants, along with damages, legal fees and a jury trial; a hearing is scheduled for Oct. 6 in St. Joseph County, Indiana. The lawsuit denies the allegations, which have not been corroborated; Greenop has not been charged with a crime, and an investigation is ongoing. Notre Dame placed Greenop on leave in June and declined to comment on the lawsuit or investigation. The lawsuit has made her name and connection to the allegations public record.
2 days ago
A former University of Notre Dame residence rector has sued people she says anonymously posted false sexual-abuse allegations about her on Instagram. The case seeks to identify the posters and pursue damages; the allegations against her have not been independently substantiated, and she has not been charged with a crime.
Elizabeth Greenop filed suit in St. Joseph County Superior Court against 10 people identified as “Jane” and “John Doe” defendants, including the account operator. She is asking the court to issue subpoenas to learn their identities.
The complaint alleges that posts shared in June and July on the unaffiliated Instagram account shareyourstory.notredame amounted to defamation and false-light invasion of privacy. Greenop denies the allegations and seeks compensatory and punitive damages, legal fees and other relief, as well as a jury trial. The complaint also accuses the account operator and post authors of acting with “actual malice.”
The account describes itself as a place to share stories of sexual assault, abuse and stalking at Notre Dame. Posts are submitted anonymously through a Google form; the account has continued to publish other allegations that do not appear to implicate Greenop.
None of the posts specifically named Greenop, but her lawsuit argues they identified her through references to her role as rector of a particular residence hall and connections among the posts. The complaint also notes that her name appeared in two news articles about the allegations; neither publication is named as a defendant.
The credibility of the allegations has not been determined. Notre Dame, which placed Greenop on leave June 29, declined to comment on either the lawsuit or its investigation. Greenop’s attorney said she had set out her position in the complaint and expressed confidence that litigation would show the anonymous claims were false.
A hearing is scheduled for Oct. 6 on Greenop’s request for subpoenas. The lawsuit has also made her name and connection to the case part of the public record.
Institutions must balance safeguarding, due process, and reputational justice
A Catholic approach treats safeguarding, due process, and reputational justice as duties that must be held together—not as competing excuses for inaction. The institution exists to serve persons and the common good, so protecting vulnerable people must not be subordinated to preserving the institution’s image. At the same time, an allegation is not itself a finding of guilt: the accused, the complainant, and witnesses all have a right to protection from illegitimate harm to their good name.
In practice, this calls for prompt and competent investigation, appropriate interim safeguards where needed, and a fair process that allows the accused a meaningful defense. Precautionary measures can protect alleged victims, witnesses, evidence, and the public good while an investigation proceeds; they should not be presented as proof that the accusation has been established.
Confidentiality can prevent prejudice, retaliation, or needless exposure, but it is not an absolute rule of secrecy. Church authorities must weigh privacy and reputation alongside the safety of others, the integrity of the investigation, and the common good; in some circumstances, communicating that an accusation exists may be justified.
So “reputational justice” should mean neither shielding an institution from embarrassment nor publicly treating an unproven accusation as settled fact. It means truthful, measured communication; respect for those who report harm; protection against retaliation; and procedures that establish responsibility on evidence rather than rumor or public pressure. The available context does not identify a particular institution or incident, so it cannot establish whether any specific response met these standards.