NORFOLK -- Attorneys for a former student who is suing Virginia Wesleyan University have filed a motion to stop the school from naming her attacked as a defendant in the case.

Last week, lawyers for the college filed a motion seeking to add the attacker as a defendant because, they said, he was responsible for the attack and not Virginia Wesleyan.

In a separate filing submitted at the same time, attorneys for the school argued that the Virginia Wesleyan did not have a legal duty to protect its students.

In today's motion, attorney Jonathan Halperin—who is representing Jane Doe, the rape victim—argued that the school cannot legally add the attacker as a defendant in the case.

In the lawsuit, Jane Doe accused the school of not doing enough to prevent her rape and failing to appropriately respond when she reported the rape to school staff.

In addition to answering the complaint, the school filed a separate legal document known as a demurrer, seeking to have the lawsuit dismissed.

The demurrer raises a number of legal arguments, the first of which contends that the school does not owe a legal duty to keep students safe.

"The existence of a duty to warn or protect is a pure question of law," the brief says. "In general, one does not have a duty to warn or protect another from third-party criminal acts."

Attorneys for the school argued that the law spells out certain scenarios in which one party owes a duty to protect another party from crimes, citing, for example, an innkeeper and a guest or a business and a customer.

The demurrer also pushes back on claims made in the lawsuit that Virginia Wesleyan has a higher rate of sexual assaults on campus than other schools.

"Plaintiffs claims that sexual assaults were occurring at an 'alarming rate' and 'in grossly disproportionate numbers' are based upon the very statistics Plaintiff claims are unreliable," lawyers argue.

Read: Full demurrer filed in response to Jane Doe's lawsuit

Lawyers for Virginia Wesleyan argue that all students are given training about the possibility of sexual assaults on campus and school administrators did nothing to contribute to the rape of the former student.

"VWC finds rape and sexual assault abhorrent and vehemently denies playing any contributing role in the rape and sexual assault alleged by Plaintiff," attorneys write.

That sentence, though, is contained in a section of the brief that alleges the former student assumed the risk of being sexually assaulted or that her negligence contributed to her assault.

"By raising this defense, VWC does not mean to imply that poor judgement or any other shortcoming on Plaintiff's part justified the rape and sexual assault she alleges," the demurrer reads.

In other filings--entered with the court at the same time as the answer and demurrer--Virginia Wesleyan filed a third-party claim against the student who raped Jane Doe in 2012. The third-party claim names the accused rapist--who is listed by name in the original lawsuit but listed by Robert Roe in the school's claim--seeks to sue the former student for up to $10 million, the same amount as the original lawsuit against VWC.

Should this case go to trial, lawyers for the college also asked a judge to select a jury from outside of Hampton Roads. In the request, lawyers wrote that Jane Doe's attorney, Jonathan Halperin, has created a 'media circus' by granting interviews about this case.

Finally, Virginia Wesleyan contends that the lawsuit should be thrown out because it is a charity. Under Virginia law, non-profit entities are immune from legal liability.

The school has come under fire from students and faculty since the lawsuit was filed. In response to previous requests for comment, the school has said that administrators did nothing wrong in handling Jane Doe's rape.

Attorneys for a former student who is suing Virginia Wesleyan University have filed a motion to stop the school from naming her attacked as a defendant in the case.

November 6, 2014 Update:

Last week, lawyers for the college filed a motion seeking to add the attacker as a defendant because, they said, he was responsible for the attack and not Virginia Wesleyan.

In a separate filing submitted at the same time, attorneys for the school argued that the Virginia Wesleyan did not have a legal duty to protect its students.

In today's motion, attorney Jonathan Halperin—who is representing Jane Doe, the rape victim—argued that the school cannot legally add the attacker as a defendant in the case.