When Tradition Becomes Trauma: A Comprehensive Guide to Hazing in Texas for Anderson County Families

The late spring night hangs heavy over an off-campus house near a Texas university. Inside, the muffled sounds of chanting and forced drinking games fill the rooms. A new member, desperate to fit in and secure his place in a revered fraternity, is pressured to down an entire bottle of hard liquor in a ritual dubbed “Big Brother night.” Laughter and smartphone cameras capture the scene, but as his eyes glaze over and his breathing becomes shallow, the atmosphere shifts from revelry to panic. No one wants to call for help, fearing “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble” with the university. Trapped between a desperate desire for belonging and his own fading consciousness, he silently prays for it to end.

This scenario, tragically common, isn’t a distant problem for families in Anderson County. While your child might attend a university in College Station, Austin, Houston, Dallas, or Waco, the impact of hazing reverberates deeply within our communities. The pain and confusion of hazing—whether it involves physical abuse, forced alcohol consumption, or relentless psychological torment—can touch any family whose student chooses to participate in Greek life, athletic teams, military organizations, or even academic clubs across our great state.

We understand these fears. We witness the devastating aftermath of hazing first-hand. This comprehensive guide aims to shed light on hazing and the law in Texas, offering critical information for parents and students in Anderson County and across Texas. We will explore what hazing truly looks like in 2025, moving beyond outdated stereotypes to expose its modern forms. We will detail how Texas and federal laws address this dangerous practice, drawing lessons from major national cases and connecting them to incidents and patterns seen at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor. Most importantly, we will outline the legal options available to victims and families in Anderson County and throughout Texas who are seeking accountability and justice.

While this article provides general information and not specific legal advice, The Manginello Law Firm is here to evaluate individual cases based on their unique facts. We serve families throughout Texas, including Anderson County and its surrounding communities, by bringing our dedicated advocacy to every case.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

• Call 911 for medical emergencies.
• Then call Attorney911: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911).
• We provide immediate help—that’s why we’re the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

In the first 48 hours:

• Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.”
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, DMs immediately.
  • Photograph injuries from multiple angles.
  • Save physical items (clothing, receipts, objects).
• Write down everything while memory is fresh (who, what, when, where).
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity/sorority.
  • Sign anything from the university or insurance company.
  • Post details on public social media.
  • Let your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

• Evidence disappears fast (deleted group chats, destroyed paddles, coached witnesses).
• Universities move quickly to control the narrative.
• We can help preserve evidence and protect your child’s rights.
• Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Anderson County families, understanding hazing today requires moving past old portrayals. Hazing is not merely “a dumb prank” or an innocent part of “just partying.” Instead, it is any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, keeping membership, or gaining status in a group. This behavior invariably endangers the physical or mental health of a student, inflicts humiliation, or exploits them for the benefit of existing members or the organization. A critical point we emphasize is that claims of “I agreed to it” do not automatically make such acts safe or legal, especially when peer pressure and inherent power imbalances are at play.

Hazing tactics have evolved, becoming more insidious and harder to detect, yet their core purpose remains the same: to create a divide between new members and old, enforce conformity, and test “loyalty” through abuse.

Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

In plain English, if someone makes you do something that is dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they did so intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly with regard to the foreseeable risk, then that is hazing under Texas law. It’s important to recognize that the intent doesn’t have to be malicious; recklessness—knowing the risk and proceeding anyway—is often sufficient for legal liability.

Main Categories of Hazing

Hazing manifests in various forms. While some are physically obvious, others leave deep, invisible scars:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is arguably the most dangerous and common form of hazing, often leading to tragic outcomes. It includes forced or coerced drinking of excessive amounts of alcohol, participation in “chugging challenges,” “lineups” where pledges consume multiple drinks in rapid succession, or games designed to ensure high levels of intoxication. The pressure to consume unknown or mixed substances, including illicit drugs, also falls into this category, putting students at severe risk of overdose or long-term health complications.

• Physical Hazing: This category spans from brute force to cunning endurance tests. It encompasses paddling and beatings, extreme calisthenics, “workouts,” or “smokings” that push individuals beyond safe physical limits. Sleep deprivation, often forced through late-night “meetings” or early morning demands, food or water deprivation, and exposure to extreme cold or heat, or other dangerous environments, are also common tactics designed to break down physical and mental resolve.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This particularly egregious form of hazing involves forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (such as the “roasted pig” positions seen in some incidents), degrading costumes, or acts with racial, sexist, or homophobic overtones. The goal is often to humiliate and strip new members of their dignity, leaving lasting psychological trauma.

• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but profoundly damaging, psychological hazing includes verbal abuse, threats, and deliberate isolation from friends and family. It can involve manipulation, forced confessions, or public shaming sessions on social media or during chapter meetings, eroding a student’s self-esteem and sense of security.

• Digital/Online Hazing: With the ubiquity of smartphones and social media, hazing has found new frontiers online. This includes group chat dares, challenges, and public humiliation via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Discord, and others. The pressure to create or share compromising images or videos creates a permanent digital footprint of abuse that can follow a student long after the hazing ends.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not confined to the stereotypical “frat boys.” It is a systemic issue woven into the fabric of many student organizations across universities in Texas, including those where Anderson County students matriculate. This often includes:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This is the most commonly recognized setting for hazing, encompassing Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and various multicultural Greek organizations.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: Organizations grounded in military tradition, like the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets, can sometimes harbor hazing practices disguised as “discipline” or “tradition.”
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs, and Campus Groups: Groups like university spirit organizations, tradition-rich clubs (e.g., the Texas Cowboys-type groups), and even competitive academic teams can fall prey to hazing.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to baseball, cheerleading, and swimming, athletic teams have a documented history of hazing, often under the guise of “team building.”
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign groups like marching bands and other student performance organizations have seen hazing incidents.
• This insidious practice can sadly permeate some service, cultural, and academic organizations, proving its reach into almost any group where new members seek acceptance.

The enduring presence of hazing, even with widespread condemnation and legal prohibitions, can be attributed to the powerful forces of social status, tradition, and secrecy. New members often feel immense pressure to endure hazing for fear of social exclusion, losing their place in a coveted group, or being seen as “weak.” This culture of silence, often reinforced by implicit or explicit threats, allows these dangerous practices to persist and evolve.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas is crucial for Anderson County families. The law provides a framework for prosecuting perpetrators and holding negligent institutions accountable.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has specific, robust anti-hazing provisions primarily found in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This code defines hazing broadly as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed either on or off campus, by an individual alone or with others, directed against a student, that:

• Endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student, AND
• Occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

This means that if someone makes you do something dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they either intended for that harm to occur or were reckless about the potential risk, that constitutes hazing under Texas law. The code explicitly covers acts that could happen on or off campus, making the location irrelevant to its classification as hazing. Furthermore, the statute protects against mental or physical harm.

Key takeaways from Texas hazing law:

• Criminal penalties: Hazing is a criminal offense. By default, it’s a Class B Misdemeanor, but it can escalate to a Class A Misdemeanor if the hazing causes injuries requiring medical treatment. Most critically, it becomes a State Jail Felony if it results in serious bodily injury or death.
• Reporter protections: Texas law, specifically § 37.154, grants immunity from civil or criminal liability to individuals who report a hazing incident in good faith to a university or law enforcement. This provision aims to encourage reporting without fear of reprisal.
• “Consent” is not a defense: As explicitly stated in § 37.155 of the Texas Education Code, it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the activity. This is a critical legal protection that recognizes the immense power imbalance and coercion inherent in hazing environments.

It is important to remember that this is a summary. The actual Texas Education Code contains more technical language and nuances. For specific legal guidance, contact our firm at 1-888-ATTY-911.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

When hazing occurs, multiple legal avenues may open, often simultaneously:

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (the District Attorney’s office or other prosecutors) on behalf of the public. Their aim is to punish the individual perpetrators. Typical hazing-related criminal charges can include the hazing offense itself, furnishing alcohol to minors, various forms of assault, battery, and, sadly, even manslaughter or negligent homicide in fatal cases. In a criminal case, the burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

• Civil Cases: These cases are primarily pursued by victims or their surviving families. The aim is not punishment but monetary compensation for losses suffered (damages) and to hold negligent parties accountable. Civil claims often focus on legal theories such as:

  • Negligence and Gross Negligence: Failure to exercise reasonable care, especially when known dangers exist.
  • Wrongful Death: When death results from another’s negligent or wrongful act (covered in more detail on our wrongful death claims page: https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/).
  • Negligent Hiring/Supervision: Failure of an organization or university to properly vet or oversee employees or student groups.
  • Premises Liability: Landowners’ responsibility to keep their property safe.
  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: Causing severe emotional harm through extreme and outrageous conduct.

A crucial point for Anderson County families to understand is that a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for a civil case. Even if criminal charges are not filed or do not result in a conviction, victims can still pursue civil litigation to seek justice and compensation.

Federal Overlay: Stop Campus Hazing Act, Title IX, Clery

Beyond state law, federal regulations also play a role in compelling universities to address hazing:

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This new federal legislation requires colleges and universities that receive federal funding to be more transparent about hazing incidents. By around 2026, institutions will need to publicly report all findings of hazing violations and provide enhanced education and prevention programs. This will create a crucial public record for families seeking to understand an institution’s history and response to hazing.

• Title IX / Clery Act: Federal laws primarily designed to address sexual harassment and campus safety can intersect with hazing. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based hostility, discrimination, or other forms of interpersonal violence, Title IX obligations can be triggered, requiring universities to investigate and respond. Similarly, the Clery Act mandates that institutions report certain crimes and maintain public safety statistics; serious hazing incidents often overlap with categories like assaults, alcohol-related offenses, and drug crimes that fall under Clery reporting requirements.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

In a civil lawsuit arising from hazing, multiple parties may be held accountable, reflecting the complex web of responsibility in these incidents:

• Individual Students: The students who directly planned, supplied the alcohol or other harmful substances, carried out the hazing acts, or participated in the cover-up can be held personally liable.
• Local Chapter / Organization: The fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself, particularly if it operates as a recognized legal entity, can be sued. Individuals acting as officers or “pledge educators” who authorized or actively participated in the hazing can be key defendants.
• National Organization: The national headquarters of a fraternity or sorority, which sets policies, collects dues, trains local chapter leaders, and oversees its affiliates, can be found liable. This liability often hinges on whether the national organization knew or should have known about a pattern of hazing within its chapters but failed to take adequate preventative or corrective action. This is called foreseeability.
• University or Governing Board: Colleges and universities themselves, or their governing boards (like the UT System or A&M System), may face lawsuits under theories of negligence, gross negligence, premises liability, or deliberate indifference. Key factors include the university’s knowledge of prior hazing, its enforcement (or lack thereof) of anti-hazing policies, and its response to reported incidents. Public universities, like UH, Texas A&M, and UT, may assert sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist, particularly in cases of gross negligence or Title IX violations. Private universities, such as SMU and Baylor, typically have lesser governmental immunity protections.
• Third Parties: Other entities can also be found liable, such as landlords or owners of properties where hazing occurred (especially if they knew or should have known about illegal activity), bars or retailers who unlawfully furnished alcohol to minors (under Texas dram shop laws), and security companies or event organizers who failed in their duty of care.

Every hazing case is fact-specific, and the precise parties liable will depend on a detailed investigation of the events, policies, and prior warnings.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

Understanding the national context of hazing is essential for Anderson County families, as these cases often shape the legal landscape and demonstrate the severe consequences of such traditions. These stories aren’t just headlines; they are precedents that expose dangerous patterns and underscore the need for accountability.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most frequently cited cause of hazing fatalities is forced or coerced alcohol consumption. These cases highlight a recurring script of excessive drinking, often compounded by a dangerous delay in seeking medical help due to a culture of secrecy and fear.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries after a bid-acceptance event at the Beta Theta Pi house. He was forced to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol, fell multiple times, and was left unattended for hours before anyone called 911. Security cameras captured the ghastly delay as his fraternity brothers failed to render aid. The aftermath saw dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation resulting in confidential settlements, and the passage of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. This case serves as a stark reminder that extreme intoxication, agonizing delays in seeking medical help, and a pervasive culture of silence are a legally devastating combination.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old FSU pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them quickly. Multiple members faced criminal hazing charges, and Florida State University temporarily suspended all Greek life, overhauling its policies in response. Coffey’s death, like Piazza’s, underscores how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights within Greek organizations are a dangerous and recurring script for disaster.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old LSU pledge, died after participating in a hazing ritual known as “Bible study.” During this event, new members were forced to drink large quantities of alcohol if they answered questions incorrectly. His death directly led to the enactment of the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana, a felony hazing law that increased the penalties for hazing that results in serious injury or death. This case highlights how public outrage and clear proof of hazing often spur significant legislative change.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire handle of bourbon during a “Big/Little” pledge night. The incident resulted in multiple criminal convictions against fraternity members. In the civil sphere, Bowling Green State University (a public institution) agreed to a nearly $3 million settlement with the Foltz family, while additional substantial settlements were reached with the national Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity and individual defendants, totaling around $10 million. The case demonstrates that not only fraternities but also universities can face significant financial and reputational consequences for hazing.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Hazing is not always about alcohol; brutal physical acts and abusive rituals remain a dangerous part of the pattern.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died from a traumatic brain injury suffered during a hazing ritual known as “the glass ceiling” at a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. Blindfolded and wearing a heavy backpack, he was repeatedly tackled. Like other cases, help was significantly delayed as fraternity members attempted to conceal the incident. Multiple members were convicted, and the national Pi Delta Psi fraternity was banned from Pennsylvania for ten years. This case underscores that off-campus “retreats” can be as dangerous or even more hazardous than on-campus parties, and national organizations can be held directly accountable for the misconduct of their chapters regardless of location.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing’s reach extends far beyond Greek life, infiltrating other revered university institutions, including athletic programs.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In 2023, former Northwestern football players brought allegations of widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. These claims led to multiple lawsuits against Northwestern University and members of its coaching staff. Head coach Pat Fitzgerald was fired and later confidentially settled a wrongful-termination suit with the university. This scandal made it unequivocally clear that hazing is not limited to Greek life and that major, high-profile athletic programs can harbor systemic, deeply ingrained abusive practices.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

For families in Anderson County and throughout Texas, these national cases are more than just news stories; they are crucial anchor points in understanding the landscape of hazing litigation. The common threads weaving through these tragedies include forced drinking, profound humiliation, physical violence, dangerous delays or denials of medical care, and systematic cover-ups. These patterns establish foreseeability—the idea that institutions and organizations should have known these dangers existed.

It’s a sobering reality that significant legislative reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements often follow only after tragedy strikes and persistent litigation brings the truth to light. Families in Anderson County, facing potential hazing incidents involving students at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, are not alone. They operate within a legal and cultural landscape profoundly shaped by the lessons learned, and painfully bought, from these national cases.

Texas Focus: UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor

For families in Anderson County, understanding the specific environments at Texas’s major universities, where many of our children attend, is critical. While hazing is a statewide issue, each institution has its own culture, policies, and history of incidents. We want to ensure Anderson County families are aware of the dynamics at these prominent schools, particularly as their children may be attending or considering them.

University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus, serves as a hub for tens of thousands of students, many of whom come from Houston and surrounding East Texas communities, including Anderson County. Its active Greek life, encompassing IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, and multicultural fraternities and sororities, alongside numerous other student organizations, consistently attracts students from our region.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH is a rapidly growing university with a diverse student body. Greek life plays a significant role in social life, and its organizations engage in a wide range of activities. Given its urban setting, many student events occur both on and off campus, which can present unique challenges for oversight.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UH maintains a clear anti-hazing policy, prohibiting such acts whether they occur on or off campus. The policy specifically forbids forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and acts causing mental distress as part of initiation or affiliation. Students and parents can report hazing incidents through the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, the Campus Police Department (UHPD), or via online reporting forms available on the university’s website. UH also publishes a general hazing statement and information on recent disciplinary actions on some of its departmental pages.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UH has faced its share of hazing allegations and disciplinary actions:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2016): One of the more severe incidents involved pledges for the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity who allegedly suffered from deprivation of food, water, and sleep during a multi-day event. Disturbingly, one student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being slammed onto a table or similar surface. This chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and a university suspension.
• Other UH fraternities and student organizations have faced disciplinary actions for behaviors “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” including alcohol misuse, forced calisthenics, and policy violations that led to suspensions or probationary periods.

These examples highlight UH’s willingness to suspend chapters when hazing is detected, though the public detail of these incidents can sometimes be limited compared to other institutions.

How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Anderson County families involved in a hazing incident at UH, legal proceedings could involve multiple agencies. Depending on the location of the incident, investigations might be conducted by UHPD for on-campus activities, or the Houston Police Department and/or the Harris County Sheriff’s Office for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits aiming to seek justice and compensation for victims would typically be filed in state district courts within Harris County, where Houston is located. Potential defendants could include the individual students involved, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and potentially the University of Houston and property owners if the incident occurred off-campus.

What UH Students & Parents Should Do

• Report immediately: Use UH’s official reporting channels (Dean of Students, UHPD, or online forms).
• Document prior incidents: If you have knowledge or find information about past hazing issues within a specific chapter at UH, document it; this can be crucial for building a civil case.
• Seek experienced legal counsel: For families from Anderson County dealing with a hazing case at UH, talking to a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases is vital. Our firm can help navigate UH’s internal processes and uncover prior disciplinary actions and internal files that may not be publicly accessible.
• Preserve all evidence: As detailed in our immediate assistance callout, secure all digital and physical evidence without delay.

Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University in College Station holds a unique place in the hearts of many Texans, drawing students from every corner of the state, including Anderson County. Its deeply rooted traditions, particularly within the Corps of Cadets and its extensive Greek life, contribute significantly to its distinct culture.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M is renowned for its spirit, traditions, and a highly organized student body. The Corps of Cadets represents a significant aspect of campus life, fostering a military-style environment that, while instilling discipline, has also faced scrutiny regarding its traditions, some of which have crossed into hazing. Beyond the Corps, A&M boasts a diverse Greek life and numerous other student organizations.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M maintains a strict hazing policy that prohibits any practice that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. Hazing is addressed through the university’s Student Conduct Office and, for Corps members, through the Corps of Cadets’ specific regulations. Anonymous reporting options are typically available through the university’s student affairs website.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced high-profile hazing incidents stemming from both Greek life and Corps traditions:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (around 2021): One disturbing case involved pledges from the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity who alleged they were covered in a mixture of raw eggs, spit, and an industrial-strength cleaner. This allegedly resulted in severe chemical burns that required emergency medical attention and skin graft surgeries for some victims. The fraternity was suspended by the university, and the affected pledges pursued a civil lawsuit.
• Corps of Cadets Hazing (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging a pattern of degrading and abusive hazing within the Corps. This included claims of simulated sexual acts and being bound in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million in damages, highlighting the severe mental and physical distress these practices can inflict. A&M stated it addressed the matter under its internal rules.
• Other incidents have involved athletic teams and other student groups, reinforcing that hazing is not confined to one sector of campus life.

These cases draw sharp attention to issues of tradition versus abuse, particularly within groups that emphasize hierarchical structures and intense loyalty.

How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Anderson County families whose children have experienced hazing at Texas A&M, investigations would likely involve the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) for on-campus incidents, or the Bryan or College Station Police Departments for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would typically proceed in the district courts of Brazos County, where College Station is located. The unique culture of the Corps often means that civil cases at A&M may need to carefully navigate both Greek life and Corps traditions and leadership structures.

What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

• Report to A&M Student Conduct or Corps leadership: These are the primary internal channels for addressing hazing.
• Document traditions vs. abuse: Be meticulous in documenting specific acts. Understanding the line between a sanctioned tradition and an abusive hazing ritual is key.
• Connect with local legal expertise: Our firm has experience with cases involving unique Texas institutions like A&M. We can help Anderson County families understand how the university’s policies and specific cultural nuances affect their case.
• Secure all evidence: Collect screenshots of group chats, photos of injuries, and accounts from witnesses.

University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is a flagship institution that attracts a significant number of students from Anderson County and across Texas. Its large size, vibrant Greek life, and influential traditions often make it a focal point for discussions about campus safety and student conduct.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin is one of the largest universities in the country, known for its academic rigor, spirited traditions, and a dynamic social scene. Its extensive Greek system, encompassing nearly 60 fraternity and sorority chapters, along with numerous other student organizations, provides a wide array of opportunities, but also carries inherent risks of hazing that impact families from communities like Anderson County.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UT Austin maintains a robust anti-hazing policy that is readily accessible on its Dean of Students website. The university defines hazing in line with state law and explicitly prohibits any conduct that endangers the physical or mental health of a student. UT stands out for its transparency, maintaining a public Hazing Violations page on its website (hazing.utexas.edu) that lists organizations, dates of incidents, findings of fact, and sanctions imposed. Students and parents can report hazing through the Dean of Students, UTPD, or the university’s Title IX Office if sexual harassment is involved.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public hazing log provides valuable insight into recurring patterns:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): The UT chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha (the same national fraternity involved in the Stone Foltz death) was disciplined after new members were directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, actions found to constitute hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (January 2024): This chapter faced allegations after an Australian exchange student was allegedly assaulted following a party, suffering serious injuries including a dislocated leg and a broken nose. The chapter was already under university suspension for prior hazing and safety violations.
• Other groups, including spirit organizations like the Texas Wranglers, have faced sanctions for forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, mock fighting, and other punishment-based practices hidden from the university.

These entries on UT’s self-reported public log are crucial because they demonstrate a pattern of past misconduct and can show that the university had knowledge of an organization’s history, which is vital for civil claims involving foreseeability.

How a UT Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Anderson County families whose children have been hazed at UT Austin, investigations could involve UTPD for incidents on or adjacent to campus, or the Austin Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would typically be heard in the district courts of Travis County. The existence of UT’s public hazing log can be a significant asset in civil litigation, providing documented evidence of an organization’s prior violations and the university’s awareness of those issues.

What UT Students & Parents Should Do

• Utilize UT’s public hazing log: Review hazing.utexas.edu to see if an organization has a history of violations.
• Report promptly: Use UT’s official reporting channels, including the Dean of Students or UTPD.
• Document everything: Screenshot any communications, photograph injuries, and gather witness accounts immediately.
• Consult an attorney with local knowledge: Our firm understands the intricacies of UT Austin’s system and the Travis County legal environment. We can advise Anderson County families on how to leverage available records and pursue a claim effectively.

Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, a private institution located in Dallas, is a popular choice for students from affluent communities across Texas, including some from Anderson County. Its vibrant Greek life and strong social scene are prominent features of the campus.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is known for its beautiful campus, academic programs, and a dynamic social environment often driven by its robust Greek system. Many new students seek to join fraternities and sororities, which play a central role in campus social hierarchy and network-building.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU strictly prohibits hazing, articulating a comprehensive policy that covers all student organizations and activities, both on and off campus. The university provides various reporting channels, including its Office of the Dean of Students, SMU Police Department, and anonymous reporting systems like “Real Response,” designed to encourage students to come forward without fear. The university emphasizes its commitment to student safety and accountability.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

SMU has also encountered hazing incidents that have led to disciplinary action:

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): This fraternity chapter faced allegations of severe hazing, including reports of new members being paddled, forced to consume alcohol, and subjected to sleep deprivation. The university responded by suspending the chapter, imposing strict restrictions on its ability to recruit new members for several years.
• Other SMU Greek organizations have faced various sanctions, including probation and temporary suspensions, for hazing-related offenses, demonstrating the university’s active measures when incidents are detected.

These incidents highlight the ongoing challenge of combating hazing even at private institutions with significant resources and seemingly strong policies.

How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Anderson County families bringing a hazing case against SMU or its student organizations, formal investigations could involve the SMU Police Department for on-campus incidents, or the Dallas Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in the district courts of Dallas County. As a private institution, SMU does not have the same sovereign immunity protections as public universities, potentially making certain aspects of civil litigation more streamlined. Our firm is experienced in navigating the discovery process with private universities, understanding how to obtain internal reports and communications even when they are not publicly posted.

What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

• Utilize SMU’s anonymous reporting options: Tools like “Real Response” can be vital for students who fear retaliation.
• Document everything: Given the challenges of a private institution’s internal transparency, meticulous documentation by the victim is even more critical.
• Understand the implications of a private university: Familiarize yourself with how a private university’s lack of sovereign immunity might impact legal recourse.
• Contact an attorney knowledgeable in Dallas County litigation: Our firm understands the local Dallas legal environment and can advise Anderson County families on pursuing claims against private institutions and their affiliated organizations.

Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Christian university in Waco, is another significant destination for students from Anderson County and throughout Texas. While its religious identity shapes much of its culture, it has also faced scrutiny over campus safety issues, including hazing.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor emphasizes a faith-based educational experience within a vibrant campus community. It offers a variety of student organizations, including Greek life, athletic teams, and mission-focused groups. The university has a documented history of navigating complex incidents, particularly those related to student conduct and safety.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing and has developed clear policies and reporting mechanisms. These policies are in line with state law and aim to prevent any activities that endanger the physical or mental well-being of students in the context of group affiliation or initiation. Students and parents can report hazing via the university’s Dean of Students office, the Baylor Police Department, or through anonymous reporting links on the student activities website.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history includes incidents of hazing, often within the context of its wider scrutiny over leadership and student welfare:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): This incident led to the suspension of 14 players from the Baylor baseball team following an internal hazing investigation. The university’s response involved staggered suspensions over the course of the early season, impacting the athletic program significantly.
• While specific high-profile fraternity or sorority incidents may not always reach the same public visibility as those at state universities, these incidents underscore that hazing risks exist across departments and student groups at Baylor.

These situations must be understood within the broader context of Baylor’s commitment to student care and safety, often clashing with its religious branding versus recurring misconduct that surfaces.

How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Anderson County families pursuing a hazing case at Baylor, investigations could involve the Baylor Police Department for on-campus incidents or the Waco Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would typically be heard in the district courts of McLennan County, where Waco is located. Similar to SMU, Baylor’s status as a private university means it does not possess sovereign immunity, which can be advantageous in civil litigation. Our firm understands the practical realities of pursuing claims against private universities like Baylor, compelling them to disclose information and hold negligent parties accountable.

What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

• Understand Baylor’s policies: Familiarize yourself with Baylor’s specific anti-hazing stance and how it is enforced.
• Report all concerns: Utilize Baylor’s official reporting channels, including the Dean of Students or the Ethics and Compliance office.
• Document evidence: Even at private institutions where transparency might be limited, thorough personal documentation is vital for any potential legal action.
• Seek attorney experienced in McLennan County: Our firm is familiar with the local legal landscape in McLennan County and can advise Anderson County families on specific strategies for hazing claims related to Baylor University.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For Anderson County families, understanding that many fraternities and sororities at Texas universities are part of large national organizations is crucial. These national bodies often have extensive histories, sometimes marred by tragic hazing incidents across the country. What happens at a chapter in another state can, and often does, inform how we pursue justice for a similar incident at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor.

Why National Histories Matter

The reality is that many fraternities and sororities present on these campuses—such as Pi Kappa Alpha, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, and Kappa Alpha Order—are affiliated with powerful national organizations. These national headquarters typically:

• Maintain thick anti-hazing manuals and elaborate risk management policies. They implement these because they have seen deaths and catastrophic injuries at their chapters in the past.
• Are aware of common hazing patterns, including forbidden forced drinking nights, ritualistic paddling, and humiliating initiation activities.

When a Texas chapter repeats the same dangerous script that led to another chapter being shut down or sued in a different state, this can be powerful evidence. It demonstrates foreseeability—the national organization should have known these dangers were present within its system—and can significantly strengthen arguments for negligence or punitive damages against these larger entities.

Organization Mapping

While we cannot list every single chapter, many nationally recognized fraternities and sororities have documented histories relevant to hazing litigation:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): This fraternity has a disturbing national pattern of alcohol-related hazing. The Stone Foltz case at Bowling Green State University (2021), where a pledge died from forced drinking, resulted in a $10 million settlement, with a substantial portion from the national fraternity. The David Bogenberger case at Northern Illinois University (2012) also involved alcohol poisoning and settled for $14 million. This history demonstrates a chronic issue with forced alcohol consumption in Pike chapters that should have put the national organization on notice about the risks at any of their campuses, including UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor.

• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): The national Beta Theta Pi organization was central to the Timothy Piazza tragedy at Penn State (2017), where a pledge died after extreme alcohol consumption and a significant delay in medical care. The civil litigation and criminal charges underscored the national’s responsibility in overseeing its chapters. Such a history creates a strong argument for foreseeability in any future hazing incident involving Beta Theta Pi, including at its chapters in Texas (e.g., at UT or A&M).

• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): This fraternity was at the center of the Max Gruver death at Louisiana State University (2017), resulting from a forced drinking game. The ensuing Max Gruver Act in Louisiana and substantial civil settlements highlight how closely national organizations are scrutinized for their oversight. Chapters at Texas universities like UT Austin, Texas A&M, SMU, or Baylor should be held to account given this national history.

• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): The Andrew Coffey death at Florida State University (2017), also due to alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother” event, led to criminal prosecution and civil litigation. This establishes a pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing within Pi Kappa Phi that could be used to demonstrate foreseeability in new cases, including at its Texas chapters (e.g., UH, Texas A&M, UT).

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): SAE has arguably one of the most troubling national hazing histories, with multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries nationwide earning it the moniker “Sigma Alpha Epsilon: Sadly Another Epsilon.” Recent incidents include a traumatic brain injury lawsuit filed in 2023 at the University of Alabama. Closer to home, lawsuits have been filed against SAE chapters at Texas A&M University (2021) for severe chemical burns requiring skin grafts from being doused with industrial cleaner, and at University of Texas at Austin (January 2024) for allegedly assaulting an exchange student. This extensive and recurring pattern of abuse at both national and Texas-specific chapters forms a powerful basis for establishing liability.

• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI): The catastrophic Danny Santulli case at the University of Missouri (2021), where a pledge suffered severe and permanent brain damage from forced alcohol consumption, highlights the potential for non-fatal but life-altering injuries within this fraternity. Settlements with 22 defendants, including the national organization, were reportedly multi-million-dollar. This case is pivotal in demonstrating the high damages possible in severe injury cases, which applies nationally to FIJI chapters like the one at Texas A&M.

• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Kappa Sigma has also had multiple hazing-related fatalities. The Chad Meredith case at the University of Miami (2001), where a pledge drowned after being coerced into a swimming event while intoxicated, resulted in a $12.6 million jury verdict. More recently, allegations of hazing at Texas A&M University (2023) resulted in severe injuries, including rhabdomyolysis from extreme physical exercise. This national and local history points to a pattern of a lack of oversight.

• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Recent cases, such as a $10 million-plus settlement for a pledge who alleged physical beatings, forced drug/alcohol consumption, and psychological torment at the College of Charleston (2024), highlight this fraternity’s hazing issues. Another case at the University of Texas at Arlington (2020) also resulted in a settlement after a pledge was hospitalized with alcohol poisoning.

• Alpha Tau Omega (ΑΤΩ): The Terry Stirling case at Old Dominion University (2006) involved a student choking on vomit after excessive alcohol consumption during a “big brother/little brother” night, leading to a confidential settlement rumored to be substantial. This again points to dangers within this national organization.

This list is not exhaustive, but these examples underscore critical patterns of abuse that have recurred across numerous institutions and across states.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

For Anderson County families, connecting these national and campus-specific histories to your child’s case at a Texas university is a cornerstone of our legal strategy. These patterns demonstrate that:

• Certain organizations, both national and local, have received repeated warnings about dangerous practices. They should have known the risks.
• Courts will examine whether national organizations:
  • Meaningfully enforced their anti-hazing policies, or if policies were mere “paper shields.”
  • Responded aggressively enough to prior incidents, or if their response was perfunctory and allowed hazing to continue.

This historical context significantly impacts several aspects of a civil hazing lawsuit:

• Settlement leverage: A strong history of similar incidents strengthens a plaintiff’s position, increasing pressure on defendants to settle fairly.
• Insurance coverage disputes: Knowing an organization’s history can help to counter claims by insurers that the incident was “unforeseeable” or that hazing is not covered due to “intentional acts.”
• Potential for punitive damages: In cases where defendants showed extreme recklessness or deliberate indifference to known dangers, a history of similar incidents can bolster claims for punitive damages, which aim to punish wrongful conduct and deter future harm.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Successfully pursuing a hazing claim against powerful institutions requires meticulous evidence collection, a deep understanding of damages, and a precise legal strategy. For Anderson County families, knowing what evidence matters and how an experienced legal team uses it can be empowering.

Evidence

In today’s digital world, evidence in hazing cases is more critical—and often more ephemeral—than ever. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it. Our firm leverages every possible avenue to uncover the truth:

• Digital Communications: These are the most critical pieces of evidence. GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, fraternity/sorority-specific apps, Instagram DMs, Snapchat messages, and TikTok comments—these platforms store conversations, plans, and instructions. We look for both live messages and work with digital forensics experts to recover deleted content. This electronic trail often reveals planning, intent, knowledge, and patterns of abuse. To understand how to preserve this, watch Attorney911’s video on using your phone to document evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs.
• Photos & Videos: Beyond what victims or witnesses record, we seek content filmed by members during events (even if they deleted it), footage shared in group chats, posts on social media, or security camera footage from houses and venues. These visual records provide undeniable proof of what transpired.
• Internal Organization Documents: Subpoenas can compel the production of pledge manuals, initiation scripts, “tradition” lists, emails or texts from officers discussing “new member education,” and national policies and training materials. These documents reveal official policies versus actual practices.
• University Records: Through discovery and, where applicable, public records requests (like the UT Austin hazing log), we seek prior conduct files, probation/suspension records, letters of warning regarding an organization, incident reports from campus police or student conduct offices, and Clery Act reports. These demonstrate the university’s knowledge of, and response to, past issues.
• Medical and Psychological Records: These document the full extent of harm. Emergency room and hospitalization records, surgery and rehabilitation notes, toxicology reports (for alcohol/drug involvement), and psychological evaluations diagnosing PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidality are all vital. These records are crucial for establishing both physical and non-economic damages.
• Witness Testimony: Pledges, former members, roommates, Resident Advisors (RAs), coaches, trainers, and bystanders can all provide critical accounts. While some witnesses may be reluctant, others, particularly former members who left due to hazing, can be powerful allies in uncovering the truth.

Damages

When hazing leaves a devastating impact, civil law provides pathways for victims and their families to seek financial recovery for their losses. We focus on recovering the full range of damages to ensure our clients’ current and future needs are met:

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This covers all costs, from immediate emergency room visits and ambulance transport to long-term rehabilitation, therapies (physical, occupational, speech), medications, surgical procedures, and in catastrophic cases, even lifetime care plans for individuals with brain injuries or organ damage.
• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: This includes compensation for income lost by the victim or by parents who had to take time off work to care for an injured child. It also covers the significant costs of missed semesters, tuition expenses for transfers, lost academic or athletic scholarships, and the delayed entry into the workforce, which can significantly alter a victim’s financial future. For those with permanent injuries, this can extend to diminished future earning capacity.
• Non-Economic Damages: These address intangible but deeply suffered losses. They include physical pain and suffering, profound emotional distress, trauma, humiliation, and the irreversible loss of enjoyment of life. This can also encompass the shame, fear, nightmares, flashbacks, and the severe erosion of trust that hazing victims endure.
• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): In the most tragic hazing cases resulting in death, surviving family members (parents, spouses, children in Texas) can seek compensation for funeral and burial costs, loss of financial support the deceased would have provided, and incalculable losses such as loss of companionship, love, society, and the severe grief and emotional suffering they experience. Attorney911 has extensive wrongful death experience (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/), having recovered millions for families in catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases.

It is important to remember that we are describing categories of damages, not promising specific dollar amounts. Each case is unique, and the compensation reflects the specific losses and harms endured.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Hazing litigation often involves navigating complex insurance policies. National fraternities, sororities, and universities typically carry substantial liability insurance. However, their insurers often attempt to limit or deny coverage by arguing:

• That hazing constitutes “intentional acts” or “criminal conduct,” which are frequently excluded from standard policies.
• That the policy doesn’t cover certain entities or individuals involved in the hazing.

Our experienced hazing lawyers, including Lupe Peña, whose background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) gives us an invaluable insider’s perspective, excel at:

• Identifying every potential source of insurance coverage.
• Challenging wrongful denials of coverage and forcing insurers to provide a defense.
• Arguing that even if an act was intentional, the institution’s negligent supervision or failure to prevent known risks is covered.

This strategic approach to insurance coverage is critical for securing the maximum possible compensation for our clients, ensuring that powerful defendants and their insurers cannot avoid their responsibilities.

Practical Guides & FAQs

We understand that Anderson County families facing a hazing crisis need clear, actionable advice. Here’s what you need to know, whether you are a parent, a student, or a witness.

For Parents

No parent wants to imagine their child experiencing hazing, but knowing the signs and how to respond is your most potent defense.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert to:

  • Unexplained injuries (bruises, burns, cuts) or repeated “accidents” with weak explanations.
  • Sudden and extreme exhaustion or significant sleep deprivation.
  • Drastic changes in mood (anxiety, depression, irritability), social withdrawal, or secrecy about group activities.
  • Constant, anxious phone use for group chats, fear of missing “mandatory” events, or always being on-call.
  • Significant academic decline, missing classes, or falling asleep during lectures due to late-night demands.
  • Reluctance to discuss what they do with the group, using phrases like “I can’t talk about it,” or “It’s a secret.”

• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not accusation. Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going?” or “Is there anything about joining this group that makes you uncomfortable?” Emphasize that their safety and well-being come first, above any group affiliation, and that you will support them regardless. Reassure them that it’s tough to leave, but their health is paramount.

• If Your Child Is Hurt:

  • Get them medical care immediately. Prioritize their health above all else. If they are severely intoxicated or injured, call 911.
  • Document everything. This includes taking clear, dated photos of injuries (from multiple angles), screenshots of any relevant texts or social media messages, and writing down a detailed account of what they tell you (names, dates, times, specific acts). Keep physical items like damaged clothing or forced purchases.
  • Save names, dates, and locations. Every detail can be crucial evidence.

• Dealing with the University: Document every conversation you have with university administrators. Ask specific questions about:

  • Any prior incidents involving the same organization.
  • What the university did or didn’t do in response to those incidents. Their knowledge of past issues can be critical to your case.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing what happened, it’s time to talk to an attorney. We can help you navigate these complex situations, protect your child’s rights, and preserve critical evidence before it’s lost.

For Students / Pledges

For students in Anderson County, especially those considering or currently involved in Greek life, athletic teams, or other organizations, understanding your rights and the realities of hazing is vital.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? If you feel unsafe, humiliated, exploited, or coerced; if you’re forced to drink or endure physical pain; if the activity is hidden from the public or administrators; if older members insist on actions they don’t have to perform themselves; or if you’re told to keep secrets—then it probably is hazing. Your gut feeling is often right.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: In hazing scenarios, “consent” is a complex and often invalid concept. The immense power dynamics, peer pressure, fear of social exclusion, and desperate desire to “belong” mean that any “agreement” to participate is rarely truly voluntary. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. You are not at fault if you were hazed, even if you “agreed” under pressure.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely: If you are in immediate danger due to intoxication or injury, call 911 immediately. You will not get in trouble for seeking medical help. If you wish to leave an organization, you have the legal right to do so at any time. If you fear retaliation, report this concern to the Dean of Students or campus police; they can often implement no-contact orders. You can also report privately or anonymously through campus channels or national tip lines.

• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Many schools and state laws, including in Texas, have “good-faith reporter” provisions, offering limited immunity or amnesty for students who call for help in an emergency, even if they were consuming alcohol underage or involved in the hazing incident. Your safety is the priority.

For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were once part of a hazing culture and now regret your involvement, or if you witnessed hazing and are struggling with what you know, your voice can be powerful.

• We acknowledge the complex feelings of guilt, fear of reprisal, and loyalty you may be experiencing. However, your testimony and any evidence you possess can be instrumental in preventing future harm and potentially saving lives.
• Cooperating with authorities or legal counsel can be a critical step toward accountability for the victims and healing for yourself. While you may want to seek your own legal advice, a lawyer can help you navigate your role as a witness, ensure your rights are protected, and explain how your cooperation can lead to meaningful change.

Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For Anderson County families navigating a hazing incident, preventing these common errors is as important as acting quickly. One client mistake can ruin an otherwise strong case. Watch Attorney911’s video on client mistakes that can ruin your injury case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY.

MISTAKES THAT CAN RUIN YOUR HAZING CASE:

1. Letting your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence.

   • What parents think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble”
   • Why it’s wrong: This looks like a deliberate cover-up; it can constitute obstruction of justice and makes building a civil case nearly impossible. Critical proof disappears.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing content. Screenshot group chats, social media messages, and texts. Backup all digital information.

2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly.

   • What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind for what they did to my child.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This immediately puts the organization and its members on alert. They will lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses on what to say (or not say), and prepare their defenses, making subsequent legal action much harder.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in private, then call a lawyer before any direct confrontation.

3. Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms.

   • What universities do: They may pressure families to sign waivers or “internal resolution” agreements, often seeming empathetic or promising a quick end to the ordeal.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue a critically important civil lawsuit for serious damages. The “settlements” offered internally are almost always far below the actual value of your child’s injuries and suffering.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or any organization without having an experienced attorney review it first.

4. Posting details on social media before talking to a lawyer.

   • What families think: “I want people to know what happened to my child and hold them accountable.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Defense attorneys will screenshot every post. Inconsistencies between social media accounts and formal legal statements can severely damage credibility. Public posts can also inadvertently waive legal privileges.
   • What to do instead: Document privately for your legal team. Let your lawyer control any public messaging to ensure it supports the legal strategy.

5. Letting your child go back to “one last meeting” or “talk it over.”

   • What fraternities say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic; let’s resolve this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This is an attempt to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can be used against your child. They may minimize the hazing or make your child feel guilty for considering exposing the truth.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication from the organization should be directed through your lawyer. Your child should not engage in any further discussions with the group.

6. Waiting “to see how the university handles it.”

   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating; let us handle this internally; we have a process for this.”
   • Why it’s wrong: While university processes can be helpful for internal discipline, they are rarely designed for full accountability or financial compensation for victims. Evidence disappears, witnesses graduate and scatter, and the strict statute of limitations continues to run. Universities often prioritize protecting their own reputation over fully compensating a victim.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW. Consult a lawyer immediately. The university’s internal process is separate from, and often insufficient for, seeking justice in civil court.

7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer.

   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim quickly.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Insurance adjusters work for the insurance company, not for you. Recorded statements are designed to lock you into a version of events that can be used against you. Early settlement offers are almost always lowball and do not reflect the true value of the damages suffered.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and state, “My attorney will contact you.”

Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT, while often claiming sovereign immunity, have exceptions for gross negligence, Title IX violations, or when claims are brought against individuals in their personal capacity. Private universities like SMU and Baylor have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on its specific facts; contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It can be. While hazing is typically a Class B misdemeanor, it escalates to a state jail felony in Texas if it causes serious bodily injury or death. This means that individuals found guilty could face felony charges, and organizations can also be fined and lose university recognition.

• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
  Yes, absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that “consent is not a defense” to hazing. Courts recognize that “agreement” under duress, peer pressure, or fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  Generally, the statute of limitations in Texas is two years from the date of injury or death. However, this period can sometimes be extended by the “discovery rule” if serious harm or its cause was not immediately apparent, or if there was fraudulent concealment. Time is critical in hazing cases—evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, and memories fade. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to ensure your rights are protected. For more detail, watch our video on the statute of limitations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of the hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national organizations can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and the foreseeability of the off-campus event. Many major hazing cases resulting in substantial judgments, such as the Pi Delta Psi retreat case (Michael Deng) or the Sigma Pi case (Collin Wiant), occurred entirely off-campus.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  Many hazing cases are resolved through confidential settlements before going to trial. We prioritize your family’s privacy and can often work to seal court records or ensure confidential settlement terms while still pursuing full accountability. For more on how cases settle, watch our video on waiting for settlement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvVvpmuLinM.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing case, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to overcome them. Attorney911 is a Houston-based Texas personal injury firm with deep experience in serious injury, wrongful death, and institutional accountability cases across the state, including for families in Anderson County.

Our firm brings unique qualifications to hazing cases:

• Insurance Insider Advantage with Lupe Peña: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, spent years as an insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She knows exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and often undervalue) hazing claims. She understands their delay tactics, their coverage exclusion arguments, and their settlement strategies because she used to be on their side. This insider knowledge gives us a decisive edge in anticipating their moves and securing full compensation. You can learn more about Lupe Peña at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.

• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions with Ralph Manginello: Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, has a proven track record of taking on the biggest defendants. He was one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, handling complex federal court experience. We are not intimidated by national fraternities, multi-billion-dollar universities, or their formidable defense teams; we have already learned how to fight powerful defendants and secure justice. Ralph Manginello’s complete credentials are detailed at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/.

• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We don’t settle cheap. We have a proven track record in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases, working with economists to value the full impact of a life lost or permanently altered. This includes experience valuing lifetime care needs for brain injuries, organ damage, and long-term psychological trauma. We build cases that meticulously force accountability and ensure clients receive the full justice they deserve.

• Criminal and Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides a distinct advantage. We understand how criminal hazing charges, which often affect individual students involved, interact with the civil litigation process. This dual perspective ensures we can advise all parties, including witnesses and former members who may face dual exposure, protecting their rights while pursuing justice for the victim.

• Investigative Depth: We leverage a robust network of experts—medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists. Our experience in complex investigations, from uncovering hidden maintenance records in industrial accidents to obtaining deleted group chats and chapter records in hazing cases, means we uncover the truth when others cannot. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

We understand that hazing at Texas universities impacts families throughout our state, including those right here in Anderson County. We know this is one of the hardest things a family can face. Our job is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and work tirelessly to help prevent this from happening to another family. We believe in thorough investigation and real accountability, not quick settlements that compromise justice.

If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus—whether at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor, or elsewhere—we want to hear from you. Families in Anderson County and throughout our region have the right to answers and accountability.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We’ll listen to what happened, explain your legal options, and help you decide on the best path forward.

Here’s what you can expect from your free consultation:

• We’ll listen to your story empathetically, without judgment.
• We’ll review any evidence you have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• We’ll explain your legal options: whether a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither, is the right path for you.
• We’ll discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
• We’ll answer your questions about costs. We operate on a contingency fee basis, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case. For more on this, watch our video explaining contingency fees: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc.
• There’s no pressure to hire us on the spot; you’ll have the time you need to decide.
• Everything you tell us is completely confidential.

Whether you’re in Anderson County or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone. Call us today.

The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911
Call: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
Direct: (713) 528-9070
Cell: (713) 443-4781
Website: https://attorney911.com
Email: ralph@atty911.com

Hablamos Español – Contact Lupe Peña at lupe@atty911.com for consultation in Spanish. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

Legal Disclaimer

This article is provided for informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC.

Hazing laws, university policies, and legal precedents can change. The information in this guide is current as of late 2025 but may not reflect the most recent developments. Every hazing case is unique, and outcomes depend on the specific facts, evidence, applicable law, and many other factors.

If you or your child has been affected by hazing, we strongly encourage you to consult with a qualified Texas attorney who can review your specific situation, explain your legal rights, and advise you on the best course of action for your family.

The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911
Houston, Austin, and Beaumont, Texas
Call: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
Direct: (713) 528-9070 | Cell: (713) 443-4781
Website: https://attorney911.com
Email: ralph@atty910.com