VermontSuperiorCourtFiled02/2824Washmgtonnit

### VERMONTSUPERIOR

### COURTWashingtonUnit65StateStreetMontpelier

### VT05602802—828—2091www.vermontjudiciary.org

### CIVILDIVISIONCaseNo.22-CV—03879£3:

## faClarificationof

### August14,2023,Order

### Followingtheresolutionofthe

### dismissalmotions,the

### Courtrecognized

### in

### itsAugust14,2023,Order

### thatthiscasemustbeunsealedasto

### remainingDefendant

### Rossiyetremainsealedastodismissed

### DefendantMr.Doe,asrequiredby12

### V.S.A.522(b).

### Itexplained

### thatthe“only

### waytocomply

### withthe

### statute

### incase

### likethisistokeepthe

### filingsalreadysealedunderseal,add

### publiclyaccessiblecopiesofthose

### filingswithappropriateredactionstoprotect

### Mr.Doe’s

### identity,and

### liftthe

### sealingorderasto

### future

### filings.”

### Itthenordered

### Mr.Doeto

### “submitcopies,underseal,of

### allcurrent

### filingsinneedofredactionstoprotect

### his

### identity

### withthoseredactionsforthe

### Court’sapproval.”

### Afterthat,thesealwouldbe

### liftedastotheredacted

### filingsand

### allfuture

### filings.

### TheCourtexpresslyordered

### thatthe

### parties

### in

### allfuture

### filingsreferto

### Mr.Doeassuchtoprotect

### his

### identity.Mr.Doe’sSeptember11,2023,effortat

### complying

### withthe

### Court’sorder

### hasproven

### highlyproblematic.(1)

### Ofmostconcern,

### manyoftheproposed,redacted

### filingsappeartobe

### versionsof

### filingsinMr.Doe’spossession

### thatdonotmatchthecorresponding

### filingsinthe

### Court’srecord,

### which

### is

### availabletothe

### parties

### inOdyssey.

### Theofficialrecordof

### thiscaseconsistsofthe

### filingsinthe

### Court’srecord.Thosearethe

### filingsthatMr.DoemustOrderPageof22—CV—03879BryanMilazzov.PeterAnthony,eta1BryanMilazzoV.ElaineRossiOrder Page 2 of 3

22

- CV

- 038 79 Bryan Mil azzo v. Peter Anthony, et al redact. Inconsistent versions in the possession of the parties are not part of the official

record of this case.

(2) As Mr. Doe notes in his September 11 filing, nearly all filings prior to

August 14 need to be redacted , at least to some extent, if for no other reason than

because Mr. Doe ’ s name appears in the c aption. Despite this, Mr. Doe failed to submit

proposed redacted vers ions of many filings, including all C ourt orders. Any c ontinuing

failure to propose redactions following this O rde r will be treated as a waiver.

(3) The Court observes that , while most of the redactions currently p roposed

are appropriately limited to con cealing information that would identify Mr. Doe, some

redactions are far more expansive. In particular, the proposed redactions to the New

York and Vermont complaints are impermissibly overbroad. Redactions are intended to

reasonably prote ct Mr. Doe ’ s id enti ty, but in doing so they must not conceal the basic

narrative alleged against Ms. Rossi.

Accordingly , within 45 days, Mr. Doe shall redo all proposed redactions according

to the following guidelines.

( a ) Each and every filing in the Court ’ s record prior to the August 14 Order

shall be identified (including by filing date) in a log.

(b) For each item in the log, Mr. Doe shall indicate whether it may be unsealed

as is or requires redaction

.

(c) For each item requiring redaction, the proposed redac t ed filing shall be

clearly labeled and identif ied in the log so that the Court may readily refer to it.

Redactions must be made to the filed

- in

- Od yssey ver sion of the filing

.Order Page 3 of 3

22

- CV

- 038 79 Bryan Mil azzo v. Peter Anthony, et al (d) Redactions shall be limited to protecting Mr. Doe ’ s identi ty without

conce aling the allegations against Ms. Rossi.

(e) The Court re ite rates that no party shall identify Mr. Doe in any filings. Mr.

Milazzo appears to have done so in several filings following the Court ’ s August 14 Order.

Mr. Doe shall include any such filings in the log with a request to seal and an

appropriate proposed redact ed filing

. Any further identification of Mr. Doe in any

unsealed filings may warrant significant sanctions.

So ordered.

Electronically signed on Wednesday, February 28, 2024 , p er V.R.E.F. 9(d).

_______________________ Timothy B. Tomasi

Superior Court Judge