When Hazing Turns to Harm: A Comprehensive Guide for Armstrong County Families on Texas Campus Hazing Lawsuits

A late-night call breaks the silence in an Armstrong County home. Your child, a bright student at a Texas university, is in the emergency room. They’re disoriented, bruised, and scared, whispering about an “initiation night” or a “pledge event” gone horribly wrong. They were pressured to drink beyond safe limits, endure degrading acts, or pushed through physically grueling tests by their fraternity, sorority, or student group. Older members filmed on phones, chanting and laughing, yet when your child collapsed, no one wanted to call 911, fearing “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble.” Your child, caught between loyalty to the group and their own safety, now faces a terrifying reality.

This isn’t just an anecdote; it’s a scenario that plays out far too often on campuses across our state, impacting families right here in Armstrong County and throughout Texas. The culture of hazing, once dismissed as “harmless tradition,” has evolved into a dangerous and sometimes fatal practice, leaving students with life-altering physical and psychological injuries.

This guide provides Armstrong County families with a comprehensive overview of hazing—what it looks like today, the Texas and federal laws designed to stop it, pivotal cases that have shaped accountability, and specific insights into how hazing manifests at major Texas universities like the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University. We also detail how to build a strong legal case, emphasizing the critical role of evidence and the potential for damages, and offer practical advice for parents, students, and witnesses.

Our firm, The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, understands the profound fear and confusion that follows a hazing incident. We serve families across Texas, including Armstrong County and its surrounding regions, seeking to shed light on these hidden harms, hold responsible parties accountable, and help prevent future tragedies.

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.” Prioritize their health and document all injuries with medical professionals.
Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
- Screenshot group chats, texts, DMs immediately, ensuring timestamps, sender names, and ample context are visible.
- Photograph injuries from multiple angles and over several days to show progression, often using a coin or ruler for scale.
- Save physical items (clothing worn during the incident, receipts for forced purchases, any objects used in the hazing).
Write down everything while memory is fresh: who was there, what happened, when it occurred, and where.
Do NOT:
- Confront the fraternity/sorority or student group directly; this can lead to evidence destruction or coached testimonies.
- Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal advice; you could inadvertently waive your rights.
- Post details on public social media; this can compromise your case.
- Let your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence; digital forensics can often recover deleted data, but original copies are always best.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

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

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Armstrong County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or student organizations, understanding what constitutes hazing today is crucial. Hazing is no longer confined to the caricatures of old movies or simple “pranks.” It has evolved into a complex, often clandestine system of coercion and abuse, enabled by technology and perpetrated under the guise of tradition, loyalty, or “bonding.”

Hazing is any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, whether on or off campus, by one person or a group, directed against a student. This act must endanger the mental or physical health or safety of a student, and it must occur for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students. The critical component that many overlook is that “I agreed to it” does not automatically make it safe or legal when there is peer pressure, power imbalance, and a coercive environment.

Main Categories of Hazing

Modern hazing manifests in several interconnected and escalating forms:

Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains the most common and deadliest form. It involves forced or coerced drinking, often excessive amounts in short periods. Examples include “lineups” where pledges consume multiple shots, chugging challenges, or “games” that require rapid, dangerous alcohol intake. Pressuring students to consume unknown or mixed substances, or large quantities of everyday items like milk or hot sauce, also falls into this category.
Physical Hazing: These acts cause direct bodily harm or extreme physical discomfort. This includes traditional paddling and beatings, but also expands to extreme calisthenics, called “smokings” or “workouts,” far beyond safe limits. Sleep deprivation, often through forced late-night meetings or tasks, and food/water deprivation are severe forms. Exposure to extreme cold or heat, or dangerous environments, also constitute physical hazing.
Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This category is deeply damaging and often involves acts designed to degrade and shame, leaving lasting psychological scars. It can include forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (like the “roasted pig” position reported at Texas A&M), wearing degrading costumes, or participating in acts with racial, homophobic, or sexist overtones.
Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but profoundly impactful, psychological hazing involves sustained verbal abuse, threats, and deliberate social isolation. Manipulation, forced confessions, and public shaming, increasingly done on social media or in group meetings, strip individuals of their self-worth and autonomy.
Digital/Online Hazing: The rise of technology has introduced new, pervasive forms of hazing. This includes group chat dares, challenges, and public humiliation orchestrated via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Discord, and GroupMe. Pledges can be pressured to create or share compromising images or videos, respond instantly to messages at all hours, or share their live location, leading to constant surveillance and anxiety.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not exclusive to fraternities and sororities. While Greek life remains a significant arena for hazing, it occurs across a wide spectrum of student organizations:

Fraternities and Sororities: This includes those across various councils—Interfraternity Council (IFC), Collegiate Panhellenic Council (CPC), National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), Multicultural Greek Council (MGC), and other independent Greek-letter organizations.
Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: The hierarchical structure and emphasis on discipline in these groups can create environments where hazing flourishes under the guise of training or tradition.
Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs: Groups like the “Texas Cowboys-type organizations” at UT Austin or other school-spirit groups can develop their own internal hazing rituals.
Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to cheerleading and swim teams, hazing in sports programs can involve physical abuse, forced substance use, and sexualized rituals.
Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign groups can harbor hidden hazing practices aimed at building “team unity” through degradation.
Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: Any group with an exclusionary membership process can be susceptible to hazing.

The common threads that allow these practices to persist are social status, tradition, and secrecy. Even when everyone “knows” hazing is illegal and dangerous, the desire for belonging, peer pressure, and fear of retaliation keep these practices alive. For Armstrong County students venturing into college life, being aware of these subtle and overt forms of hazing can be the first step in staying safe.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape around hazing in Texas is crucial for any Armstrong County family touched by it. Both state and federal laws provide avenues for criminal prosecution and civil recourse, establishing a framework for accountability.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has specific, robust anti-hazing provisions outlined in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. In plain terms, these laws define hazing broadly as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by an individual or group, directed against a student, that:

Endangers the physical or mental health or safety of a student, or
Is done for the purpose of initiation into, affiliation with, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

Crucially, the law specifies that consent is not a defense to hazing in Texas. Even if a student technically “agreed” to participate, the law recognizes the inherent power imbalance and coercive nature of hazing.

Criminal Penalties in Texas

The criminal charges for hazing in Texas can be severe:

Class B Misdemeanor: The default charge for hazing that does not cause serious injury (punishable by up to 180 days in county jail and/or a fine of up to $2,000).
Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury requiring medical attention.
State Jail Felony: If the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. This includes conditions like extreme alcohol poisoning leading to organ damage, or traumatic brain injuries.

Beyond the direct acts of hazing, Texas law also criminalizes:

Failing to report hazing: If an officer or member of an organization knew about hazing and failed to report it, they could face misdemeanor charges.
Retaliating against someone who reports hazing: This is also a misdemeanor, designed to protect victims and witnesses who come forward.

Organizational Liability

Texas law also holds organizations accountable. Under § 37.153 of the Education Code, fraternities, sororities, clubs, and sports teams can be criminally prosecuted if:

The organization authorized or encouraged the hazing, OR
An officer or member acting in their official capacity knew about the hazing and failed to report it.
Penalties for organizations can include fines of up to $10,000 per violation and university-imposed sanctions like revocation of recognition or outright bans. This dual accountability for individuals and institutions is critical for ensuring justice.

Immunity for Good-Faith Reporting

To encourage reporting, Texas law provides immunity for good-faith reporters. A person who genuinely reports a hazing incident to university authorities or law enforcement is immune from civil or criminal liability that might otherwise arise from their report. Furthermore, Texas law and university policies often extend amnesty to students who call 911 for a medical emergency, even if underage drinking or hazing was involved, prioritizing saving lives over punishment.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

It’s important for Armstrong County families to understand the distinction between criminal and civil legal actions in hazing incidents:

Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (prosecutors) against individuals or organizations. The goal is punishment—such as jail time, fines, or probation. Common hazing-related criminal charges beyond direct hazing offenses include furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, or even manslaughter in fatal cases.
Civil Cases: These are initiated by victims or their surviving families against individuals and institutions. The primary goal is monetary compensation for damages suffered, along with holding the negligent parties accountable. Civil claims often involve theories of:
- Negligence or gross negligence (failure to exercise reasonable care, or reckless disregard for safety).
- Wrongful death (when hazing leads to a fatality).
- Negligent hiring, supervision, or retention (of coaches, advisors, or administrators).
- Premises liability (when hazing occurs on unsafe property).
- Intentional infliction of emotional distress.

A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for pursuing a civil case. Both types of legal action can run concurrently, and each serves distinct purposes in achieving justice and preventing future harm.

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

Beyond state laws, federal regulations also impact hazing accountability, influencing institutions that receive federal funding:

Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal law requires colleges and universities receiving federal financial assistance to significantly enhance their transparency and prevention efforts regarding hazing. By approximately 2026, institutions must publicly report hazing incidents, detailing violations and sanctions, and strengthen their hazing education and prevention programs. This will provide unprecedented data and accountability.
Title IX: If hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, or gender-based discrimination or hostility, it can trigger Title IX obligations. This federal law prohibits sex-based discrimination in education and requires institutions to investigate and respond appropriately to such incidents, regardless of whether they occurred on or off campus.
Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act mandates that colleges and universities publish annual security reports and maintain a public crime log. Hazing incidents, especially those involving assault, alcohol/drug violations, or sexual misconduct, often fall under the purview of Clery reporting, contributing to campus safety transparency.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

In a civil hazing lawsuit in Texas, various parties might be held liable, depending on the specific facts of the case:

Individual Students: Those who planned, orchestrated, supplied alcohol for, carried out, or actively participated in the hazing acts, or helped cover them up.
Local Chapter / Organization: The fraternity, sorority, club, or student group itself (if it’s a recognized legal entity). This often includes officers, “pledge educators,” or other leadership positions within the group.
National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters that establish policies, provide guidance, collect dues, and often exercise some supervisory role over local chapters. Their liability can stem from what they knew or should have known about a chapter’s hazing history or propensity.
University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself, including its administrators and relevant departments (e.g., Dean of Students, Greek Life office). Liability can be established through theories of negligence, especially if the university had prior knowledge of hazing, failed to enforce its own policies, or demonstrated deliberate indifference to student safety. Public universities in Texas (like UH, Texas A&M, UT) may invoke sovereign immunity, but exceptions often exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, or specific federal claims like Title IX violations. Private universities (like SMU, Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections.
Third Parties: This can include landlords or property owners of off-campus houses or event spaces where hazing occurred, particularly if they were aware of dangerous activities. Bars or alcohol providers might also be liable under dram shop laws if they served obviously intoxicated individuals who then caused harm.

Every hazing case is fact-specific; not every potential party is liable in every situation. An experienced hazing attorney carefully investigates all avenues of liability to ensure comprehensive accountability and compensation for Armstrong County victims.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragic pattern of hazing persists nationwide, with heartbreaking consistency. Major national cases serve as critical anchor stories, highlighting common hazing methods, legal consequences, and patterns of institutional failure. These precedents, though occurring outside Texas, are vital for understanding the legal landscape for Armstrong County families, as they establish foreseeability, expose liability, and often influence legal strategies and settlements in our state.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most frequent and fatal form of hazing involves forced or coerced alcohol consumption, leading to extreme intoxication and often death.

Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died following a “bid acceptance” event where he was forced to consume egregious amounts of alcohol. Fraternity surveillance cameras captured him falling multiple times, suffering severe head injuries, yet his “brothers” delayed calling for medical help for nearly 12 hours. This deeply disturbing incident led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the enactment of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. For Texas families, this case underscores how extreme intoxication, delayed medical care, and a dangerous culture of silence can be legally devastating, often resulting in both criminal and civil liability.
Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. He was reportedly given a handle of hard liquor and pressured to consume it rapidly. This tragedy resulted in criminal hazing charges against multiple members and prompted Florida State to temporarily suspend all Greek life, leading to a comprehensive overhaul of its hazing policies. The Coffey case illustrates how seemingly formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster within Greek organizations, impacting students nationwide, including those from Armstrong County.
Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge at LSU, died from alcohol toxicity with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.495% after participating in a hazing ritual called “Bible study.” Pledges were forced to drink whenever they answered questions incorrectly. This tragic death propelled Louisiana to enact the Max Gruver Act, a stringent felony hazing law. The case highlights that legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of hazing, a possibility we always consider for Texans.
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 drink an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” pledge night. This incident led to multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members, and the Foltz family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with approximately $3 million from Bowling Green State University and $7 million from Pi Kappa Alpha national. This case is crucial for Texas families, showing that universities, even public ones, can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities, particularly when they had prior knowledge or failed to act.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physical and ritualized abuse also represents a prevalent and dangerous hazing pattern.

Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old fraternity pledge, died after participating in a brutal, blindfolded “glass ceiling” ritual during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. Pledges, weighed down with backpacks, were repeatedly tackled. His “brothers” delayed calling 911 for crucial hours. This heartbreaking case led to multiple members’ convictions, and the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter and subsequently banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years. This case is a stark reminder for Armstrong County families that off-campus “retreats” can be as dangerous or even more so than parties, and national organizations can face severe criminal penalties and civil sanctions.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing’s reach extends far beyond Greek life, infiltrating high-profile athletic programs where it can be equally, if not more, insidious.

Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): A massive scandal erupted at Northwestern when former football players alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. These allegations included forced “dry-humping” by one player on another, often involving coaches or staff witnessing it without intervention. This situation triggered multiple lawsuits against Northwestern University and its coaching staff, leading to the termination of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who later settled a wrongful-termination suit confidentially with the university. This case demonstrates unequivocally that hazing is not limited to Greek life; major, high-stakes athletic programs can harbor systemic abuse, raising questions about institutional oversight and accountability.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national anchor stories reveal critical common threads in hazing incidents: profound physical and psychological abuse, forced drinking, humiliation, violence, a pervasive culture of secrecy, and tragically, delayed or denied medical care that often exacerbates injuries and leads to death. They also highlight that meaningful reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements often follow only after tragedy and persistent litigation.

For Armstrong County families facing hazing situations at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, these national lessons are incredibly relevant. The precedents established in these cases provide invaluable insights into how to establish foreseeability, prove negligence, and pursue accountability against powerful institutions and national organizations. You are not alone in this fight, and the legal landscape is slowly but surely shifting in favor of victims and their families.

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

The landscape of higher education in Texas offers both incredible opportunities and, unfortunately, exposure to the persistent problem of hazing. For Armstrong County families, understanding the specific contexts at our state’s major universities—the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University—is crucial. Families in Armstrong County may send their children to any of these institutions, and even if they choose a school further afield, the patterns of hazing and the applicable Texas laws remain consistent. As Houston-based Texas hazing specialists, we are familiar with the unique dynamics of each campus and the local jurisdictions involved.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus, is a significant hub of student activity, including a diverse and active Greek life, numerous student organizations, and athletic programs. Located in the heart of the nation’s fourth-largest city, UH draws students from across Texas, including Armstrong County.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH serves a broad student body, mixing commuter and residential populations. Its campus life is characterized by a dynamic social scene, with a strong emphasis on community engagement within Houston. Greek life at UH is extensive, encompassing Panhellenic, Interfraternity, National Pan-Hellenic, and Multicultural Greek councils, alongside a wide array of other student groups.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, explicitly prohibiting any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of affiliation or membership. This policy explicitly covers forced consumption of alcohol/food/drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and mental distress. UH encourages reporting through its Dean of Students Office, Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD), and provides clear online reporting forms for students to anonymously or directly report incidents.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

While UH does not publish as detailed a public log of hazing violations as some other institutions, documented incidents have surfaced:

2016 Pi Kappa Alpha Case: In a notable incident involving the Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) fraternity, pledges were allegedly subjected to extreme sleep, food, and water deprivation during a multi-day event. This hazing culminated in one student suffering a lacerated spleen after being violently slammed onto a table or similar surface. The local chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was subsequently suspended by the university, highlighting the severe physical dangers involved.
Ongoing Disciplinary Actions: UH has consistently shown a willingness to suspend Greek chapters and other organizations found responsible for hazing behaviors, particularly those involving alcohol misuse and activities designed to cause mental or physical discomfort. The details of these disciplinary actions, while not always broadly publicized in full, reflect the university’s efforts to enforce its anti-hazing policies.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, understanding the logistical and legal aspects of a hazing case at UH is essential. Due to its urban location, civil suits arising from hazing at UH would typically be filed in courts within Harris County, which encompasses Houston. Depending on the exact location of the incident (on-campus vs. off-campus), involved law enforcement agencies could include both the UHPD and the Houston Police Department. Potential defendants in such cases could encompass individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and potentially the University of Houston itself, along with any relevant property owners.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

Report Hazing Immediately: Familiarize yourself with UH’s reporting channels (Dean of Students, UHPD, online forms). Timely reporting is key.
Document Everything: If you suspect or witness hazing, meticulously document details: dates, times, locations, individuals involved, and specific behaviors.
Preserve Digital Evidence: Screenshot group chats, social media posts, and text messages. This digital footprint is often the most damning evidence.
Seek Legal Counsel: If hazing has caused harm, contact a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases like Attorney911. We can help navigate the university’s internal processes and uncover prior disciplinary actions or internal files that might be relevant to your case.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University in College Station is renowned for its deep-seated traditions, particularly its Corps of Cadets, and a strong sense of Aggie camaraderie. Students from Armstrong County frequently attend A&M, often drawn by its legacy and acclaimed programs.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M’s identity is heavily influenced by its military origins and the proud tradition of the Corps of Cadets, a deeply hierarchical and discipline-focused environment. This culture, while fostering loyalty, can also present ground for hazing under the guise of “training” or “earning your keep.” Greek life is also prominent, alongside numerous other student organizations. The university’s official policies prohibit hazing across all these groups.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M unequivocally prohibits hazing, adhering strictly to Texas state law. The university’s policies emphasize that hazing can occur in any student organization and explicitly forbids physical abuse, forced consumption, mental abuse, and any act that endangers a student’s health or safety. Reporting is facilitated through the Office of Student Conduct, the Texas A&M University Police Department, and various online reporting portals, designed to encourage a safe and prompt response.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced significant hazing incidents, particularly within its Greek system and the Corps of Cadets:

2021 Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit: Two pledges of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity alleged severe hazing that involved being covered in a mixture of substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in severe chemical burns for both pledges, requiring extensive medical treatment and skin graft surgeries. The fraternity chapter was suspended for two years by the university, and the pledges subsequently filed a $1 million lawsuit against the fraternity, highlighting the extreme and dangerous nature of modern hazing.
2023 Corps of Cadets Lawsuit: A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging degrading and explicit hazing within the Corps. The allegations included forced simulated sexual acts and being bound between beds in a notorious “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million, drawing attention to how hazing can be deeply embedded even in revered traditions. In a more recent 2023 Kappa Sigma case, allegations surfaced of hazing resulting in rhabdomyolysis – a severe muscle breakdown due to extreme physical exertion – indicating persistent issues with physical hazing.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, a hazing case originating at Texas A&M would likely be handled in Brazos County courts. The primary law enforcement agency for on-campus incidents would be the Texas A&M University Police Department. Civil litigation might target individual students, the chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, the university, and potentially Corps leadership, depending on the circumstances. Armstrong County families would need legal representation familiar with both state and campus disciplinary proceedings.

5.1.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

Understand Corps and Greek Rulebooks: Be intimately familiar with the specific rules and anti-hazing policies governing the Corps or Greek life at Texas A&M.
Report All Suspicions: Utilize A&M’s anonymous reporting options, or directly contact the Office of Student Conduct or TAMUPD.
Preserve All Evidence: Pay close attention to calls for sleep deprivation, unusual substances, or demands for extreme physical exertion. Document everything, particularly digital communications.
Consult Experienced Legal Counsel: If your child, or a child you know from Armstrong County, is involved in hazing at Texas A&M, contact Attorney911. We have experience with both Greek life and Corps-related hazing cases and can guide you through the process.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The flagship institution of the Texas university system, the University of Texas at Austin, located just a few hours’ drive from Armstrong County, is known for its vibrant campus and robust student life. It is also one of the most transparent in the state regarding hazing incidents.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin boasts a dynamic campus culture, with a highly active and diverse Greek system, numerous tradition-bound spirit organizations (like the Texas Cowboys and Texas Wranglers), and competitive athletic programs. Its position in the state capital makes it a focal point for both academic achievement and social activity.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UT Austin maintains an explicit anti-hazing policy congruent with Texas state law, defining hazing broadly to include any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. Critically, UT operates a public Hazing Violations webpage which transparently lists organizations, dates of violation, descriptions of conduct, and disciplinary sanctions. This tool provides invaluable insights into recurring hazing patterns. Reporting is managed through the Office of the Dean of Students, the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD), and comprehensive online reporting forms.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT’s public registry provides detailed examples of hazing that reflect national trends but with a local context:

2023 Pi Kappa Alpha Incident: The UT chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike), a fraternity with a national history of severe hazing, was sanctioned after new members were directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics (known as “smokings” or extreme workouts). This was found to be hazing, resulting in disciplinary actions including probation and mandatory hazing-prevention education.
Texas Wranglers and Other Groups: UT’s public log frequently features organizations beyond traditional fraternities, such as the Texas Wranglers spirit group, sanctioned for forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, degradation, and punishment-based practices. This demonstrates that hazing is a campus-wide issue, not confined to Greek life.
2024 Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Incident: An Australian exchange student alleged severe assault by SAE members at an off-campus party, resulting in a dislocated leg, broken ligaments, fractured tibia, and a broken nose. The student filed a lawsuit for over $1 million against the chapter, which was already under suspension for prior hazing and safety violations. This underscores that even suspended chapters can continue dangerous behavior and face legal challenges.

5.3.4 How a UT Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, hazing cases at UT Austin would mainly proceed through Travis County courts. Investigations might involve both the UTPD and the Austin Police Department, especially for off-campus incidents. UT’s transparent public log of hazing violations is a powerful tool for civil litigation, helping establish patterns of misconduct, prior institutional knowledge, and foreseeability, which are critical elements in negligence claims.

5.3.5 What UT Students & Parents Should Do

Check the UT Hazing Violations Page: Regularly consult UT’s transparency page to review current and historical hazing sanctions for organizations. This information is invaluable for making informed decisions.
Document Public Records: Screenshots of UT’s public hazing log can be crucial evidence if you need to pursue a case.
Utilize UTPD and Dean of Students: For on-campus incidents—or those with a clear campus connection—these are often primary points of contact for official interventions.
Contact a Lawyer Familiar with UT Cases: Attorney911 is experienced in navigating UT’s specific policies and using its public information in cases, which can be essential for Armstrong County families seeking justice.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, nestled in Dallas, exudes an affluent, exclusive atmosphere with a historically strong emphasis on Greek life. Many Armstrong County students seeking a private university experience often look to SMU.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is a private, selective university known for its beautiful campus and a highly competitive social scene dominated by its vast Greek system. This environment, while fostering strong alumni networks, can sometimes inadvertently create conditions where hazing rituals are perceived as rites of passage or necessary for social acceptance.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU staunchly prohibits hazing in any form, aligning its policies with Texas state law. The university’s Office of Student Affairs outlines explicit prohibitions against physical, mental, or emotional abuse for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. SMU encourages students to report hazing through its Dean of Students Office, the SMU Police Department, and an anonymous reporting system called Real Response, reflecting efforts to manage incidents proactively.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

SMU has also faced its share of hazing challenges within its prominent Greek community:

2017 Kappa Alpha Order Incident: The SMU chapter of Kappa Alpha Order was involved in a significant hazing incident. New members reportedly endured paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and severe sleep deprivation beyond acceptable limits. This led to the fraternity’s suspension and restrictions on its recruiting activities for several years, demonstrating the university’s disciplinary response to severe violations.
Ongoing Challenges: While SMU, as a private institution, may not always publicly disclose the full details of all disciplinary actions, its commitment to anti-hazing initiatives, including specific training for student leaders and advisors, shows a recognition of ongoing risks.

5.4.4 How a SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases arising from incidents at SMU for Armstrong County families would typically be filed in Dallas County courts. The SMU Police Department would be the primary law enforcement agency for campus-related incidents, with the Dallas Police Department potentially involved for off-campus events. Unlike public universities, private institutions like SMU do not have the same sovereign immunity protections, which can simplify some aspects of civil litigation. However, they are often vigilant in protecting their reputation, making experienced legal representation crucial to compel full discovery of internal records.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

Understand SMU’s Reporting Mechanisms: Familiarize yourself with the various ways to report hazing at SMU, including anonymous options like Real Response.
Document Everything: Given the often discreet nature of private university disciplinary actions, meticulous personal documentation of any hazing incident is paramount.
Seek Immediate Legal Consultation: If hazing impacts your family, especially from Armstrong County, contact Attorney911. We can help navigate SMU’s particular policies and processes, and aggressively pursue evidence that might not be publicly available.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University in Waco, while smaller and religiously affiliated, is a major Texas institution that attracts students from across the state, including Armstrong County. Its unique culture has also presented specific challenges related to student conduct and oversight.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor, a private Baptist university, combines strong academic programs with a faith-based mission. Its campus culture emphasizes community and tradition, but like other universities, it hosts a vibrant Greek life and numerous student organizations, including strong athletic programs. Baylor’s history includes significant scrutiny over its handling of high-profile misconduct cases, which has led to increased awareness and, theoretically, stricter enforcement of student safety policies.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing, adhering to Texas law and its own institutional values. The university defines hazing as any act that impacts the physical, mental, or emotional well-being of a student for the purpose of affiliation. Baylor’s policies emphasize a “zero tolerance” approach and encourage reporting through its office of Student Conduct, the Baylor University Police Department, and various online reporting mechanisms designed to ensure confidentiality while prompting investigation.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor has experienced notable hazing incidents, demonstrating that such issues can arise even within religiously affiliated institutions:

2020 Baylor Baseball Hazing: A significant incident involved the Baylor baseball program, leading to the suspension of 14 players following a comprehensive hazing investigation. The suspensions were staggered over the early season to mitigate impact on the team, but the incident underscored that hazing can affect high-profile athletic teams, regardless of the university’s stated values.
Broader Cultural Challenges: Baylor’s past has included intense public and legal scrutiny surrounding its handling of sexual assault cases within its athletic departments. This history has compelled the university to implement systemic reforms related to student safety, oversight, and reporting. While hazing is distinct from sexual assault, these broader oversight challenges inform how Baylor handles all forms of student misconduct.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, hazing cases at Baylor University would typically be heard in McLennan County courts. The Baylor University Police Department would primarily handle on-campus investigations. Similar to SMU, Baylor’s status as a private university means it does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making civil litigation different from cases against public institutions. However, its strong institutional resources mean pursuing claims requires experienced legal counsel ready to navigate complex legal and reputational defenses.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

Familiarize with Baylor’s Policies: Understand Baylor’s specific anti-hazing policies and reporting procedures, which are often integrated with its broader student conduct code.
Document and Report: Document any instances of hazing, paying particular attention to situations that involve religious or moral coercion, which can be unique to a faith-based institution. Report concerns to the appropriate Baylor authorities.
Consult Legal Expertise for Complex Cases: If hazing has caused significant harm to your child from Armstrong County at Baylor, contact Attorney911. Our understanding of Baylor’s institutional context, including its prior legal challenges and reform efforts, can be invaluable in building a strong case.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

The heart of many hazing incidents lies within the culture of Greek-letter organizations. For Armstrong County families to truly understand the issue, it’s essential to connect the practices at local chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor to the broader, often problematic, histories of their national organizations.

Why National Histories Matter

The vast majority of fraternities and sororities thriving on Texas campuses, such as Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike), Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE), Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, and Kappa Alpha Order, are not isolated entities. They are chapters of national organizations with headquarters, extensive anti-hazing policies, risk management manuals, and, critically, a history of past incidents – often involving severe injuries and deaths.

National organizations put these thick policy manuals and risk management guidelines in place precisely because they have faced public outcry, multi-million-dollar lawsuits, and legislative action due to previous hazing incidents. They know, from repeated experience at other universities, the patterns that lead to tragedy: forced drinking nights, physically demanding rituals, and humiliating acts perpetrated in the name of “tradition.”

When a local chapter in Texas repeats the same dangerous script that led to a judgment or another chapter being shut down in another state, it creates a powerful legal argument for foreseeability. It directly shows that the national organization knew—or should have known—that such hazing was a potential risk within their system but failed to adequately prevent it. This knowledge can dramatically bolster arguments for negligence and even punitive damages against national entities.

Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

Many fraternities and sororities present at Texas campuses have ties to serious national incidents. While full rosters change, we focus on those with a documented history of severe hazing.

Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): Active at UH, Texas A&M, and UT. Nationally, Pike has a tragic record, prominently featuring the Stone Foltz case (Bowling Green State University, 2021), where a pledge died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume excessive alcohol. The Foltz family secured a $10 million settlement. Another notable case is David Bogenberger (Northern Illinois University, 2012), whose death from alcohol hazing led to a $14 million settlement. These past incidents establish a clear pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing tactics within the organization.
Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): Present at UH, Texas A&M, and UT. SAE has been involved in multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries nationwide over the years. This pattern includes a traumatic brain injury lawsuit filed against an SAE chapter at the University of Alabama (2023) and the tragic death of Carson Starkey (California Polytechnic State University, 2008) from alcohol poisoning. In Texas, an A&M chapter faced a $1 million lawsuit for pledges sustaining chemical burns from industrial cleaner and other substances poured on them (2021). At UT, an SAE chapter was sued for over $1 million (2024) after an exchange student alleged severe assault at a party, occurring while the chapter was already under suspension for prior violations. These cases demonstrate a recurring pattern of dangerous physical and alcohol-related hazing.
Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU. This fraternity is nationally known for the Max Gruver case (Louisiana State University, 2017), where a pledge died from acute alcohol toxicity during a forced drinking game. The tragedy spurred Louisiana to pass the Max Gruver Act, making hazing a felony.
Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, and UT. This organization was involved in the death of Andrew Coffey (Florida State University, 2017), a pledge who died from alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event that involved heavy drinking.
Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU. The Timothy Piazza case (Penn State, 2017) remains a watershed moment, with Piazza dying from injuries after excessive alcohol consumption and delayed medical care. This led to significant criminal and civil actions, and the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania.
Kappa Alpha Order (ΚΑ): Present at Texas A&M and SMU. This fraternity has faced hazing allegations resulting in suspensions at various campuses, including a past incident at SMU where new members were reportedly paddled, forced to drink, and deprived of sleep (2017).
Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, and UT. A recent case at the College of Charleston (2024) saw a payout of more than $10 million to a pledge who alleged physical beatings, forced consumption, and psychological torment. Another incident at the University of Texas at Arlington (2020) involved a pledge hospitalized with alcohol poisoning, leading to a settlement.
Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, Baylor, and UT. This fraternity was liable in the Chad Meredith case (University of Miami, 2001), where a pledge drowned after being pressured to swim across a lake while intoxicated, resulting in a $12.6 million jury verdict. More recently at Texas A&M (2023), allegations of hazing causing severe injuries like rhabdomyolysis have been subject to ongoing litigation.
Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI): Active at Texas A&M. Nationally infamous for the Danny Santulli case (University of Missouri, 2021), where a pledge suffered severe, permanent brain damage from forced alcohol consumption, leading to multi-million-dollar confidential settlements with 22 defendants.

These examples reveal a pattern: certain organizations, regardless of campus, repeatedly engage in dangerous behaviors. Their national leadership is often aware of these recurring issues due to prior incidents at other chapters but may fail to implement effective preventative measures.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

The documented national histories of these Greek organizations are not just historical footnotes; they are potent legal tools for Armstrong County families.

Foreseeability: These patterns demonstrate that national organizations had a clear warning that specific hazing activities were dangerous and could cause harm.
Negligent Supervision: It can be argued that if a national organization has a history of alcohol-related hazing deaths, yet a Texas chapter repeats that pattern, the national body failed in its duty to adequately supervise, intervene, and enforce its own anti-hazing policies.
Insurance Coverage: Such patterns can be crucial in challenging insurance companies that try to deny coverage by claiming a hazing incident was an “unforeseeable accident” or an “intentional act” outside policy limits.
Punitive Damages: When an organization repeatedly ignores clear warnings and continues to allow dangerous hazing, it can open the door to claims for punitive damages, designed to punish egregious conduct and deter future harm.

For families in Armstrong County, this means that an experienced hazing attorney doesn’t just investigate the local incident. We delve into the national history of the organization to build a comprehensive case, aiming for full accountability against all negligent parties.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

For Armstrong County families considering legal action after a hazing incident, understanding how a case is built is essential. It moves from meticulous evidence collection to a detailed assessment of damages, informed by strategic legal expertise.

Evidence

Modern hazing cases are often won or lost based on the quality and volume of evidence gathered. Timely preservation is critical, as evidence can disappear quickly.

Digital Communications: These are often the most crucial pieces of evidence in hazing cases today. This includes group chats and direct messages (DMs) from platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, and even fraternity/sorority-specific apps. We look for plans, instructions, admissions, reactions, deletions, and any attempts at cover-ups. Attorney911’s video “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) comprehensively explains how to properly screenshot and save this vital information, ensuring full threads, timestamps, and participant names are visible.
Photos & Videos: Beyond official documentation, content filmed by members during hazing events, or footage shared in private group chats or on social media, can be invaluable. This includes pictures of injuries, humiliating acts, forced drinking, and even security camera footage from houses or venues.
Internal Organization Documents: These include pledge manuals, initiation scripts, “tradition” lists, and communications from officers regarding new member activities. National organization policies and training materials are also critical to assess, especially when demonstrating lack of enforcement or prior knowledge.
University Records: Through discovery and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests (for public institutions), we seek prior conduct files, probation or suspension records, incident reports from campus police or student conduct offices, and even internal emails among administrators discussing the organization. The University of Texas at Austin’s public Hazing Violations page is a prime example of accessible university records that aid in building cases.
Medical and Psychological Records: Comprehensive medical documentation of injuries (ER visits, hospitalizations, surgeries, toxicology reports) and psychological evaluations (diagnoses of PTSD, depression, anxiety stemming from the incident) are vital for proving both physical and emotional harm. We work with experts to establish the link between hazing and these health impacts.
Witness Testimony: Testimony from other pledges, current or former members, roommates, coaches, or bystanders who witnessed the hazing is often instrumental. Obtaining statements from former members who quit or were expelled can be particularly powerful.

Damages

When a hazing incident causes harm, victims and their families in Armstrong County can seek to recover various types of damages, aiming to compensate for losses and provide for future needs.

Medical Bills & Future Care: This covers all costs, from immediate emergency room visits and ambulance transport to long-term needs like physical therapy, specialized surgeries, medication, and ongoing psychological counseling for trauma. For catastrophic injuries like traumatic brain injury, a “life care plan” accounts for lifelong medical and personal care needs.
Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: This includes lost income if the victim or a parent had to take time off work. It also covers the significant impact on a student’s education, such as missed semesters, lost scholarships, delayed graduation, and ultimately, a reduced earning capacity if permanent injuries (physical or psychological) hinder their career progression.
Non-Economic Damages: These subjective but very real harms include physical pain and suffering from injuries, emotional distress, trauma, and humiliation. Loss of enjoyment of life encompasses the inability to participate in activities once loved, social withdrawal, and damage to relationships.
Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): If hazing results in a fatality, surviving family members, as defined by Texas law, can recover for funeral and burial costs, loss of financial support (calculated over the deceased’s expected lifetime), and immense non-economic losses such as loss of companionship, love, guidance, and the grief and emotional suffering they endure. 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.
Punitive Damages: In cases where hazing was particularly egregious, malicious, or demonstrated a callous disregard for safety (e.g., ignoring repeated warnings, actively covering up, or organizing extremely dangerous rituals), punitive damages may be sought. These are designed to punish the defendants for their wrongful conduct and deter others from similar actions. Texas law places some caps on punitive damages, but they remain a powerful tool for accountability.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

A crucial aspect of hazing litigation is navigating the complex web of potential defendants and their insurance coverage. National fraternities and universities often have sophisticated legal teams and extensive insurance policies. However, insurers frequently attempt to deny coverage by arguing that hazing or “intentional acts” are excluded from their policies.

Experienced hazing lawyers, like those at Attorney911, specialize in this area. We:
– Identify All Potential Coverage Sources: This can include individual members’ homeowner policies, local chapter policies, national fraternity/sorority policies, and university umbrella policies.
– Navigate Exclusion Disputes: We challenge insurance companies’ attempts to deny coverage, often arguing that while the hazing act itself might be intentional, the organization’s negligent supervision or failure to prevent known risks is covered. Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) is crucial here; she knows their playbook because she used to run it.
– Compel Defense: We force insurers to defend their insureds, leading to settlement opportunities.

This strategic approach to insurance coverage ensures that victims have a complete pathway to compensation, even against powerful, deep-pocketed defendants.

Practical Guides & FAQs

For Armstrong County parents, students, and witnesses, knowing what to do – and what not to do – in the aftermath of a hazing incident is paramount. Your actions in the immediate hours and days can significantly impact the outcome of a potential legal case.

8.1 For Parents

Parents are often the first line of defense against hazing, and your vigilance and informed response are critical:

Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert to unexplained bruises, burns, cuts, or other injuries, especially if your child’s explanations don’t quite add up. Look for sudden, extreme fatigue, sleep deprivation, or drastic shifts in mood, such as increased anxiety, depression, or withdrawal from previous activities. A common red flag is constant secrecy about student organization activities, often accompanied by insistent phone use for group chats and an unspoken fear of missing a “mandatory” event, even if it interferes with academics or rest.
How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not judgment. Start with open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with your group?” Emphasize that your primary concern is their safety and well-being, and that you will support them regardless of their choices about the organization. Reassure them they can confide in you without fear of blame.
If Your Child Is Hurt: Get them medical attention immediately. Even if they claim to be “fine,” a medical professional can assess injuries, perform toxicology screenings, and document everything, which is crucial for both health and legal purposes. Document everything yourself: take detailed photos of injuries (multiple angles, over several days), screenshot any texts or social media messages your child shows you, and write down every detail about what they tell you (who, what, when, where).
Dealing with the University: If you engage with university administrators, document every communication (names, dates, times, what was discussed). Ask specific questions about prior incidents involving the same organization and what actions the school took or failed to take.
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 the incident or attempting to conceal facts, contact an experienced hazing attorney. We can guide you through the reporting process and explain your legal options.

8.2 For Students / Pledges

If you are a student or pledge involved in a hazing situation, your safety and well-being are the top priority.

Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Ask yourself: Am I being pressured or forced to do something I don’t truly want to do? Would I do this if my parents or university officials were watching? Is this making me feel humiliated, unsafe, or endangering my mental or physical health? If the activity is hidden from outsiders, involves secrecy, or punishes non-participation, it is likely hazing, regardless of what it’s called.
Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: In Texas, if an activity meets the legal definition of hazing, your “consent” to participate is not a defense for those who hazed you (Texas Education Code § 37.155). The law recognizes the immense peer pressure, power dynamics, and fear of exclusion that often make “agreement” less than voluntary in these contexts.
Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the absolute right to leave any organization at any time. If you feel unsafe, remove yourself from the situation immediately and contact a trusted adult (parent, RA, school official). You can report hazing anonymously through campus channels or national hotlines like 1-888-NOT-HAZE.
Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Many universities and Texas law offer good-faith reporting protections. If you call for medical help in an emergency, even if underage drinking or other violations are involved, you are typically granted amnesty from certain disciplinary actions, prioritizing saving lives.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you are a former member, a witness, or someone who participated in hazing and now regrets it, your perspective is vital.

Acknowledging your guilt or fear is a crucial first step. Your testimony and willingness to provide evidence can be instrumental in preventing future harm and saving lives.
You have the right to seek your own legal advice to understand your potential exposure. However, cooperating with investigators (university, police, or attorneys for a victim) can be an important step toward accountability and often helps mitigate personal legal consequences. An experienced attorney can guide you through this process, protecting your own rights while helping bring truth to light.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

Armstrong County families must be aware of common missteps that can severely compromise a hazing lawsuit. These mistakes often stem from a desire to protect the student or the organization but can have devastating consequences for a case. Attorney911’s video, “Client Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Injury Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY), further elaborates on these pitfalls.

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 cover-up, can be considered obstruction of justice, and makes proving your case exponentially harder. What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even content that feels embarrassing or incriminating, and consult with a lawyer.
Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly: What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind.” Why it’s wrong: This immediately signals your intent, prompting the organization to lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare defenses. What to do instead: Document everything privately, then call a lawyer before any direct confrontation.
Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms: What universities do: Pressure families to accept internal “resolutions” or sign waivers. Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue legal action, and these settlements are often far below the true value of the case. What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything without an experienced attorney reviewing it first.
Posting details on social media before talking to a lawyer: What families think: “I want people to know what happened.” Why it’s wrong: Defense attorneys screenshot everything posted publicly, and any inconsistencies can be used against you. It can also waive legal privileges. What to do instead: Document privately, and let your lawyer control any public messaging strategically.
Letting your child go back to “one last meeting” with the organization: What fraternities/sororities say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic.” Why it’s wrong: This is often a tactic to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can later be used against the victim. What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication with the organization should typically go through your lawyer.
Waiting “to see how the university handles it”: What universities promise: “We’re investigating; let us handle this internally.” Why it’s wrong: Evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, the statute of limitations runs, and the university’s primary goal is often to protect its own reputation, not necessarily the victim’s full compensation. What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW and consult a lawyer immediately. The university’s internal process is distinctly separate from personal accountability.
Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer: What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim.” Why it’s wrong: Recorded statements can be used against you, and initial settlement offers are almost always lowball. What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and refer them to your attorney.

8.5 Short FAQ

“Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
Yes, under specific circumstances. Public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, UT) have certain sovereign immunity protections, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, Title IX violations, and when suing individuals in their personal capacity. Private universities (like SMU, Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on its unique facts, so 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 if it causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who are officers of an organization and fail to report hazing can also face criminal charges.
“Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
Yes. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. The law recognizes that “agreement” given under peer pressure, a power imbalance, or fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent.
“How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
Generally, there is a 2-year statute of limitations in Texas for personal injury and wrongful death cases, measured from the date of the injury or death. However, the “discovery rule” can extend this period if the harm or its cause was not immediately apparent. In cases involving deliberate cover-ups or fraud, the statute may be “tolled,” or paused. Time is critical, though; evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations destroy records. Attorney911’s video, “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c), provides further details. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately for advice.
“What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
The location of hazing does not necessarily eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and the foreseeability of hazards. Many significant hazing cases, such as the Pi Delta Psi retreat death of Michael Deng or incidents at “unofficial” off-campus houses, occurred off-campus and still resulted in substantial judgments or settlements.
“Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
Most hazing cases settle confidentially before trial. While some high-profile cases do become public, many families prefer to maintain privacy, and we work to achieve that. You can request sealed court records and confidential settlement terms. We prioritize your family’s privacy while aggressively pursuing accountability.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing incident, especially one as traumatic and complex as those occurring at Texas universities, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, we provide exactly that: empathetic, knowledgeable, and aggressive representation on behalf of victims and families in Armstrong County and across Texas.

From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Armstrong County and its surrounding areas, understanding that hazing at Texas universities affects communities across the region. We regularly help families facing issues at Texas A&M, UT Austin, UH, SMU, and Baylor.

Our firm’s unique qualifications are particularly suited to hazing litigation:

Insurance Insider Advantage: Our Associate Attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable experience as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She knows precisely how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and often undervalue) hazing claims. She understands their delay tactics, coverage exclusion arguments, and settlement strategies because she used to run their playbook. This insider knowledge gives our clients a distinct edge from the outset. You can learn more about Lupe Peña at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.
Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Our Managing Partner, Ralph P. Manginello, has a proven track record in complex litigation. He was one of the few Texas attorneys involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, taking on a billion-dollar corporation and winning. This federal court experience and history of fighting powerful defendants mean we are not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their well-resourced defense teams. We fight for full accountability, not just easy settlements.
Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have built cases that force accountability, securing multi-million-dollar settlements in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. We work with economists and medical experts to fully value the economic and non-economic losses, including the lifetime care needs for victims with traumatic brain injuries or permanent disabilities.
Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the prestigious Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides critical insight into how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual expertise allows us to advise witnesses and former members who might face criminal exposure, ensuring all angles of a hazing incident are expertly handled. Attorney911’s criminal defense expertise is detailed on our website: https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/.
Investigative Depth: We understand how to investigate modern hazing. This includes obtaining deleted group chats and social media evidence through digital forensics, subpoenaing national fraternity records showing prior incidents, uncovering university files through discovery and public records requests, and collaborating with a network of medical, psychological, and other experts. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

We understand that hazing cases are not just about legal documents; they are deeply personal tragedies. We approach every family’s story with empathy, unwavering support, and a commitment to obtaining justice. Our goal is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force accountability and lasting change.

If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus, from Armstrong County or anywhere else in our great state, we want to hear from you. The Manginello Law Firm offers a confidential, no-obligation consultation to review what happened, explain your legal options, and help you decide the best path forward. We offer a contingency fee basis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc), which means we don’t get paid unless we win your case.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911 today for immediate support:

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 directly at lupe@atty911.com for a confidential consultation in Spanish. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

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

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@atty911.com