Jacobowitz claims breach of contract

Eden Jacobowitz, a recent College graduate, has filed a civil suit against the University for more than $50,000 in damages he claims he suffered during the fallout of the 1993 "water buffalo" incident. He claims that his actions at the time were in compliance with the University's official policies and procedures, particularly its racial harassment policy. In his lawsuit, Jacobowitz brings seven counts against the University, including gross negligence, breach of contract, infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and defamation. Jacobowitz and his attorney, Edward Rubenstone, maintain that the University did not behave in a professional or contractual manner during the 1993 proceedings. In response to his suit, the University has filed written objections to the case. Jacobowitz was charged with racial harassment when he shouted "Shut up, you water buffalo," to a group of black sorority women from his High Rise East window. The disciplinary proceedings against him were dropped before the judicial hearing was over, but Jacobowitz said he feels he was not given the chance to vindicate himself of any wrongdoing. The lawsuit charges the University with negligence in many areas, but specifically in the violation of contractual terms and a failure to disclose "exculpatory evidence." Violation of contractual terms refers to the University policies and procedures which all students agree to comply with when they enter the University. Jacobowitz said last night that his "water buffalo" statement "does not qualify as racial harassment under the terms of the 1992-93 policy." The 1992-93 racial harassment policy defines racial harassment as "any verbal or symbolic behavior that insults or demeans the person or persons to whom the behavior is directed? on the basis of his or her race, color, ethnicity or national origin." The policy also states that the behavior must be "intended by the speaker or actor only to inflict direct injury on the person or persons to whom the behavior is directed." According to Jacobowitz, he did not make any references to the race, color, ethnicity or origin of the women. He also claims that he had no intent to "inflict injury upon them." "I just wanted them to quiet down," he said. "It should take the average person about 15 minutes to figure out that I'm not guilty." The lawsuit also cites the University for imposing a "double standard" when dealing with the women. Jacobowitz claims he was not extended the same fair treatment the sorority women were given when dealing with the issue of academic advisors. The lawsuit also assails the University for not providing the complete 10-page University Police report on the incident during the 1993 hearings. Jacobowitz said the document provided at the trial was only a single page recounting the incident. "They did not include the whole report the police wrote up, which basically stated I was innocent," he said. The count against the University for invasion of privacy deals with the University's publishing of the charges against Jacobowitz. It argues that since the claims had no basis, the University had no right to publish them -- and by doing so, the school publicly defamed Jacobowitz. The lawsuit cites the University's breach of contract and invasion of privacy as reasons for Jacobowitz's "emotional and academic distress." Jacobowitz and his attorney have requested several documents from the University as part of the period of discovery they have initiated. "I'm sure once we get those documents, we'll have more charges to bring against [the University]," he said.