Texas Hazing: A Comprehensive Guide for Clay County Families Affected by Campus Abuse

Imagine this: it’s a chill late autumn evening in Texas. Your son, a promising student who grew up in the tight-knit communities of Clay County, is away at one of our state’s excellent universities – maybe Texas A&M, UT Austin, or even the sprawling urban campus of UH. He’s just pledged a fraternity, excited to make new friends and build connections. Tonight is “bid acceptance” or “big-little reveal,” a tradition that many see as harmless fun.

But it’s not fun. He’s been blindfolded, driven to an undisclosed off-campus location, and now he’s being forced to drink an entire bottle of cheap liquor, or endure brutal calisthenics, or perhaps worse. Peers, some just barely older than him, are chanting, filming on their phones, and laughing. He feels the room spinning, his breath catching, a growing panic. Someone else has already vomited, but no one wants to call 911 for fear of “getting the chapter shut down” or, worse, “getting in trouble” themselves. He’s trapped between a deeply ingrained sense of loyalty to this new group and his own survival.

This scenario isn’t a distant nightmare; it’s a terrifying reality for far too many families across Texas, including those here in Clay County whose children attend our state’s colleges and universities. Hazing, in its modern and often insidious forms, continues to inflict severe physical and psychological trauma, and tragically, even death, on young Texans every year.

We understand that sending your children off to college is a source of immense pride, but it can also bring unexpected anxieties. When that anxiety turns to terror because your child has been subjected to the dangers of hazing, you need clear information, steadfast reassurance, and powerful legal advocacy.

This comprehensive guide is designed for families in Clay County and across Texas who are navigating the complex, often heartbreaking, landscape of campus hazing. We will explain:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, reaching far beyond old stereotypes.
• How Texas and federal laws address hazing and hold perpetrators accountable.
• The critical lessons from major national hazing cases and how they directly impact Texas families.
• The specific hazing challenges and patterns we see at University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University.
• Detailed insights into the histories of fraternities and sororities and how national patterns of abuse fuel liability in civil lawsuits.
• What legal options victims and families in Clay County and throughout Texas may have, and how an experienced hazing attorney can help.

This article offers general information, not specific legal advice for your unique situation. However, we at The Manginello Law Firm are ready to evaluate your family’s specific case. While our primary office is in Houston, we proudly serve families throughout Texas, including Clay County and surrounding communities, bringing our expertise to wherever help is needed.

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, every moment counts:

• Get medical attention immediately, even if your child insists they are “fine.” Prioritize their health and safety above all else.
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted: screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages immediately.
• Photograph any visible injuries from multiple angles, noting the date and time.
• Save physical items like clothing worn during the incident, receipts for forced purchases, or any objects used in the hazing.
• Write down everything while memory is fresh: who was involved, what happened, when, and where. This contemporaneous account can be crucial evidence.
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity, sorority, or team directly. This can lead to evidence destruction or witness coaching.
  • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal review. You could inadvertently waive your rights.
  • Post details on public social media. This can compromise your child’s privacy and potentially harm a legal case.
  • Allow your child to delete messages or “clean up” any evidence.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney immediately, ideally within 24–48 hours:

• Evidence disappears fast, including deleted group chats, destroyed paddles, and coached witnesses.
• Universities often move quickly to control the narrative following an incident.
• We can help preserve critical evidence, navigate complex university policies, and protect your child’s legal rights.
• Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate consultation and guidance.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Clay County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or collegiate team dynamics, the perception of hazing might be stuck in the past – a few silly dares or harmless pranks. However, the reality of hazing in 2025 is far more sinister, sophisticated, and dangerous. It’s a spectrum of abuse, from subtle psychological manipulation to life-threatening physical assaults, all designed to assert power, enforce conformity, and maintain secrecy.

We define hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, whether on or off campus, by one person or a group, directed against a student, that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of that student. This occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation, affiliation, maintaining membership, or holding office in any organization whose members include students. It’s crucial to understand that actively saying “I agreed to it” does not automatically make the activity safe or legal when there is peer pressure, a power imbalance, and an implicit threat of exclusion or punishment for non-participation.

Main Categories of Modern Hazing

Hazing tactics have evolved, often becoming more covert to evade detection. Here are the main categories we see today:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is, tragically, the most common and often fatal form of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking of excessive amounts of alcohol, often in short periods. This includes chugging challenges, “lineups” where pledges consume drinks rapidly, and drinking games where wrong answers or specific cues lead to mandatory consumption. It also encompasses pressuring new members to consume unknown or illicit substances.
• Physical Hazing: Beyond the cliché of paddling, physical hazing includes extreme calisthenics, brutal “workouts,” or “smokings” (forced exercise until exhaustion) that go far beyond healthy conditioning. It often involves sleep deprivation, food and water restriction, and exposure to extreme temperatures or dangerous physical environments, all of which can severely compromise a student’s health. Reports of specific beatings, slaps, and even “branding” (burning with cigars or other objects) still occur.
• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This category involves deeply degrading and traumatizing acts. It can include forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (sometimes referred to as “elephant walks” or “roasted pig” positions), and other sexually coercive behaviors. Often, these acts are combined with performative public shaming that may include racial, homophobic, or sexist slurs and role-playing, which can leave lasting psychological scars.
• Psychological Hazing: This form of abuse leaves no visible bruises, but its impact can be profound. It includes constant verbal abuse, threats, forced isolation from friends and family, and manipulative tactics designed to break down a new member’s self-esteem. Public shaming, often conducted on social media or during group meetings, can create a hostile and mentally damaging environment.
• Digital/Online Hazing: A newer but increasingly prevalent form of hazing leverages technology. This can include demanding participation in group chat dares, “challenges” that border on dangerous stunts, and public humiliation via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Discord, or GroupMe. It also involves pressure to create or share compromising images or videos, or to engage in cyberstalking or harassment campaigns against others. Constant, immediate demands in group chats that lead to sleep deprivation also fall into this category.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception that hazing is limited to “frat boys” or Greek letter organizations. While fraternities and sororities, including Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek groups, are often implicated, hazing permeates a much wider array of collegiate organizations:

• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: Organizations with strong traditions and hierarchical structures can be particularly susceptible to hazing, where “earning your place” often devolves into abuse. Texas A&M’s Corps of Cadets, for example, has faced hazing allegations.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs: Groups like spirit organizations, university traditions clubs (such as those mirroring the Texas Cowboys-type groups at UT), and even glee clubs can be environments ripe for hazing under the guise of “bonding” or “tradition.”
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming, baseball, cheerleading, and even club sports, team hazing is unfortunately widespread. It often involves extreme physical conditioning, forced alcohol consumption, and humiliating rituals presented as team building.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign groups like collegiate marching bands and performance ensembles have reported hazing incidents, often involving physical exhaustion, psychological torment, and forced secrecy.
• Some Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: While less common than in other types of groups, hazing can occur in any student organization where a power differential between new and old members is exploited.

The unfortunate truth is that in a collegiate setting, where young adults are seeking identity and belonging, social status, unexamined “tradition,” and a powerful code of secrecy can keep these abusive practices alive, even when everyone “knows” hazing is illegal and explicitly prohibited by university policy. The desire to fit in and the fear of social exclusion are powerful motivators that perpetrators exploit, making it incredibly difficult for pledges or new members to speak out.

Law & Liability Framework: Texas and Federal Anti-Hazing Efforts

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas is crucial for Clay County families seeking justice and accountability. While the emotional and physical toll of hazing is immense, the law provides a framework for addressing these harms through both criminal penalties against individuals and organizations, and civil avenues for victims and their families to seek monetary compensation.

Texas Hazing Law Basics: A Strong Legal Foundation

Texas has specific, robust anti-hazing provisions embedded in its Education Code, making it clear that such activities are illegal and carry serious consequences.

Texas Education Code § 37.151. Definition:

Hazing is broadly defined, encompassing any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, whether taking place on or off campus, by one person alone or in conjunction with others, directed against a student, that:

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

In plain language, if someone makes you do something that is dangerous, harmful, humiliating, or degrading as a condition of joining or staying in a group, and they intended to do it, knew it would happen, or were simply reckless about the risks, that constitutes hazing under Texas law. The location—whether it’s on university property, at an off-campus house, or during a remote retreat—does not negate its status as hazing. Importantly, mental harm, such as extreme humiliation or psychological torment, is recognized alongside physical harm. The crucial element of “intent” is often met simply by showing that the perpetrators acted “recklessly,” meaning they knew the risks but disregarded them anyway.

Texas Education Code § 37.152. Criminal Penalties:

Texas law outlines serious criminal consequences for hazing:

• Class B Misdemeanor (default): Hazing that does not result in serious injury is typically a Class B misdemeanor, carrying potential penalties of up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes an injury that necessitates medical treatment, the charge can be elevated to a Class A misdemeanor.
• State Jail Felony: Critically, if the hazing results in serious bodily injury or death, it becomes a state jail felony. This conviction can lead to significant prison time.

Additionally, Texas law makes it a crime to:

• Fail to report hazing: If you are a member or officer of an organization and you know about hazing, failing to report it is a misdemeanor offense.
• Retaliate: Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor.

Texas Education Code § 37.153. Organizational Liability:

Organizations themselves – including fraternities, sororities, clubs, or athletic teams – can face criminal prosecution for hazing. This occurs if:

• The organization authorized or actively encouraged the hazing activities, 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. Furthermore, universities have the authority to revoke the organization’s recognition and ban it from campus, a severe blow to its existence. This provision is vital because it ensures that both individuals and the collective organization can be held criminally accountable, a principle that often extends to civil liability as well.

Texas Education Code § 37.155. Consent Not a Defense:

This particular section directly addresses one of the most common, yet invalid, defenses in hazing cases. The statute explicitly states that it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the hazing activity. This provision is paramount because it legally recognizes that “consent” given under duress, immense social pressure, or the fear of exclusion is not true, voluntary consent.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Two Paths to Justice

It’s important for Clay County families to understand that legal action against hazing can proceed down two distinct paths, often simultaneously:

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated and pursued by the state (through a prosecutor) against individuals who have violated hazing laws or other criminal statutes. The primary aim of a criminal case is to punish the perpetrator (e.g., jail time, fines, probation, community service). In hazing contexts, typical criminal charges can range from misdemeanor hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, or battery, all the way up to serious felony charges like involuntary manslaughter in cases of hazing-related death.
• Civil Cases: These lawsuits are brought directly by the victims or their surviving families against those responsible for the hazing. The aim of a civil case is to secure monetary compensation and accountability for the harm suffered. Civil liability often focuses on legal theories such as:
  • Negligence and Gross Negligence: Did the defendants fail to exercise reasonable care, causing harm? Was their disregard for safety particularly egregious?
  • Wrongful Death: When hazing leads to a fatality, surviving family members can sue for the profound losses they’ve endured.
  • Negligent Hiring/Supervision: Did a university or national organization fail to properly vet or oversee its staff or chapters, leading to hazing?
  • Premises Liability: Were landowners or event space owners negligent in maintaining a safe environment where hazing occurred?
  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: Was the hazing so extreme and outrageous that it caused severe emotional suffering?

Crucially, a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. The burden of proof is lower in civil court, and even if criminal charges are dropped or result in an acquittal, a civil lawsuit can still succeed.

Federal Overlay: Strengthening Accountability

Beyond Texas state law, federal regulations also play a role in addressing campus hazing:

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This significant federal legislation mandates that colleges and universities receiving federal financial aid must enhance their transparency and prevention efforts regarding hazing. By around 2026, institutions will be required to:
  • Report hazing incidents and outcomes more comprehensively and publicly.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention programs for students and staff.
  • Maintain and make available public data on hazing violations reported on their campuses.
• Title IX / Clery Act: When hazing incidents involve sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based hostility, or other forms of discrimination, Title IX obligations—which prohibit sex-based discrimination in education—are triggered. Similarly, the Clery Act requires colleges to report certain crimes and maintain safety statistics; hazing incidents often overlap with these categories when they involve assaults, alcohol- or drug-related offenses, or other violent acts. These federal acts provide additional avenues for reporting and accountability, even if not directly focused on hazing alone.

Who Can Be Held Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit?

Civil hazing lawsuits can involve multiple parties, reflecting the complex web of individuals and institutions often contributing to or enabling hazing:

• Individual Students: These are the primary actors – the ones who planned, orchestrated, supplied the dangerous substances, carried out the acts, or actively participated in the hazing and cover-up.
• Local Chapter / Organization: The fraternity/sorority chapter itself (if it’s a separate legal entity) or the specific club or team involved can be sued. This often includes individual officers or “pledge educators” who were in leadership roles.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters, which sets policies, receives dues, and ostensibly supervises its chapters, can be held liable. Such liability often hinges on whether the national organization knew or should have known about a pattern of hazing (either within that specific chapter or across its system) and failed to intervene or enforce its own rules.
• University or Governing Board: Colleges and universities themselves can be sued under various theories, including negligence, gross negligence, negligent supervision, or for violations of Title IX or other civil rights. Key questions in these cases include whether the school had prior knowledge or warnings of hazing, whether it adequately enforced its own anti-hazing policies, and how it responded to previous incidents. Public universities, like UH, Texas A&M, and UT, may have some sovereign immunity protections, but critical exceptions exist for gross negligence or malicious conduct. Private universities, like SMU and Baylor, typically have fewer governmental immunity protections.
• Third Parties: Other entities can also be found liable, such as:
  • Landlords or Property Owners: If hazing occurred at off-campus houses or event spaces, the owners may be implicated for failing to provide a safe environment or for knowingly permitting illegal activities.
  • Bars or Alcohol Providers: Under Texas dram shop laws, establishments that negligently serve alcohol to visibly intoxicated individuals or to minors, and whose actions contribute to a hazing incident, can be held liable.
  • Security Companies or Event Organizers: Any third-party responsible for safety or event management could also face liability if their negligence contributed to the harm.

It’s important to remember that every case is fact-specific, and not every party will be found liable in every situation. An experienced hazing attorney meticulously investigates each potential defendant to ensure all responsible parties are held accountable.

National Hazing Case Patterns: Anchor Stories and Their Lessons

The legal landscape of hazing accountability has been dramatically shaped by a series of high-profile tragedies across the nation. These cases, while occurring outside of Texas, set critical precedents and reveal patterns that resonate deeply with what we see at Texas universities, and what Clay County families need to understand. They underscore the severe consequences of hazing and the determined fight for justice and reform.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern: A Repeating Script

Perhaps the most common and devastating hazing pattern involves forced or coerced alcohol consumption, leading to severe injury or death.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries after an extreme “bid acceptance” night. Piazza was forced to consume vast quantities of alcohol, then fell repeatedly, sustaining grave injuries. Disturbing fraternity security camera footage showed his fraternity brothers delaying calling for medical help for nearly 12 hours, fearing repercussions for their chapter. This tragedy led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the enactment of Pennsylvania’s landmark Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law.
  • Why it matters for Texas: This case vividly illustrates how extreme intoxication, a deliberate delay in calling 911, and a pervasive culture of silence and cover-up can escalate hazing into a criminal and civil nightmare. Similar patterns of delayed medical intervention are reported in Texas hazing incidents.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, also a pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to drink them quickly. Criminal hazing charges were brought against several members, and Florida State University temporarily suspended all Greek life and implemented significant policy overhauls.
  • Why it matters for Texas: Coffey’s death highlights how ritualized “tradition” drinking nights, where excessive alcohol is central to the initiation, are a repeating script for disaster in chapters across the country, including those with branches at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor.
• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, a pledge at LSU, died from alcohol toxicity after participating in a hazing ritual called “Bible study.” During this deadly “game,” pledges were forced to consume alcohol whenever they answered questions incorrectly. His death led to the passing of the felony hazing statute in Louisiana, known as the Max Gruver Act.
  • Why it matters for Texas: The Max Gruver Act demonstrates how profound tragedies can spark legislative change, solidifying hazing as a serious criminal offense. While Texas has its own anti-hazing laws, cases like Gruver’s serve as a powerful reminder of how civil litigation and public pressure can force legal reform.
• 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 bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” night. Multiple criminal convictions followed for fraternity members involved, and Bowling Green State University (a public institution) eventually agreed to a historic nearly $3 million settlement with the Foltz family. Additional settlements were reached with the national fraternity and other individuals, bringing the total to $10 million.
  • Why it matters for Texas: The Foltz case underscores that universities, even public ones with potential immunity defenses, can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities. It exposes the corporate negligence of national fraternity organizations who knew of such practices within their chapters yet failed to adequately prevent them.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern: Beyond Alcohol

Hazing dangers are not limited to alcohol. Physical and ritualized abuse can also be fatal.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a pledge of Pi Delta Psi fraternity, died from a traumatic brain injury suffered during a brutal “glass ceiling” hazing ritual at a remote off-campus retreat in the Pocono Mountains. Members blindfolded him, forced him to wear a heavy backpack, and repeatedly tackled him. His fraternity brothers again delayed calling for emergency services for critical hours. Multiple members were convicted, and the national fraternity was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, subsequently banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years.
  • Why it matters for Texas: This case is a stark reminder that off-campus “retreats” are not safe havens from liability. They are often chosen specifically to evade university oversight, yet liability can extend to national organizations regardless of location. It also showcased that national organizations can face corporate criminal liability.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse: Not Just Greek Life

Hazing is unfortunately not exclusive to Greek letter organizations; it can permeate other competitive campus groups.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In a scandal that rocked collegiate athletics, former football players at Northwestern University alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. This included forced sexual acts, racial slurs, and degrading rituals. Multiple players filed lawsuits against the university and coaching staff, leading to the firing of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed his own wrongful-termination suit (which he later settled confidentially in August 2025).
  • Why it matters for Texas: This high-profile case proves that hazing is not limited to Greek life. Major, high-budget athletic programs, including those at large Texas universities, can harbor systemic cultures of abuse. It also demonstrates how institutional failures and cover-ups can lead to widespread civil litigation and significant reputational damage.

What These Cases Mean for Clay County Families in Texas

The common threads running through these national tragedies are chillingly consistent: forced drinking, extreme physical abuse, humiliation, deliberate delay in seeking medical care, and concerted efforts to cover up the incidents. While laws are strengthened and campuses promise “zero tolerance,” true accountability and multi-million-dollar settlements often only follow after tragedy strikes and courageous victims or their families pursue diligent civil litigation.

For Clay County families whose children attend UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, these national lessons are not distant news stories. They are blueprints for how hazing can unfold, and they underscore the critical importance of understanding your legal rights and recourse if your family is ever impacted. The framework of accountability established in these cases is what guides us as we advocate for justice in Texas.

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

For families in Clay County, or anywhere across Texas, understanding the unique cultures and specific hazing histories of our major universities is paramount. While many of these schools are a significant distance from Clay County, parents regularly send their children to these institutions. The legal principles and patterns of hazing apply universally across Texas, and our firm is equipped to assist families regardless of which campus their child attends.

University of Houston (UH)

Distance from Clay County: Approximately 300 miles southeast of Clay County. Families sending children to UH from Clay County should be aware of campus dynamics in a large urban setting.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Houston is a sprawling, vibrant urban campus, serving as a major hub for education and research. With a diverse student body, UH offers both commuter and residential experiences. Its active Greek life, comprising a multitude of fraternities and sororities across various councils (IFC, Panhellenic, MGC, NPHC, UGC), plays a significant role in campus social life. Beyond Greek life, UH boasts a wide array of student organizations, including cultural groups, academic societies, and sports clubs, all of which can unfortunately be susceptible to hazing.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UH maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, prohibiting any form of hazing whether it occurs on-campus or off-campus. The policy explicitly forbids forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs; sleep deprivation; physical mistreatment; and any activity causing mental distress for initiation or membership purposes. Students are encouraged to report hazing through the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, or directly to the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). Anonymous reporting options are typically available through online forms or hotlines.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

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

• 2016 Pi Kappa Alpha Case: In a particularly troubling incident, pledges of the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity at UH allegedly faced severe deprivation of food, water, and sleep during an extended event. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being violently slammed onto a table or similar surface as part of the hazing. The local chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was subsequently suspended by the university.
• Ongoing Disciplinary Actions: Beyond this specific incident, UH periodically issues disciplinary measures against fraternities and other student organizations for behaviors deemed “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort.” These often involve alcohol misuse, forced servitude, and violations of organizational conduct policies, leading to periods of suspension or probation for the offending chapters.

These incidents highlight UH’s commitment to taking action against hazing, but also underscore the persistent challenges in enforcing anti-hazing policies within active Greek systems. The university’s willingness to suspend chapters, while commendable, often comes only after significant harm has occurred. Public details of these incidents, however, are sometimes limited compared to more transparent institutions such as UT Austin.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a hazing incident at UH, several agencies and legal jurisdictions could become involved. If the incident occurred on campus or within the city limits of Houston, the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD), the Houston Police Department, or both, depending on the severity and specific location, would investigate potential criminal charges. Civil suits stemming from hazing at UH would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. This means that families from Clay County would seek legal recourse in civil courts located in Houston.

Potential defendants in such a case could include the individual students directly involved, the local fraternity or sorority chapter, the national organization, property owners (if the incident occurred off-campus at a private residence), and potentially the university itself, depending on its knowledge and actions or inactions.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents connected to the University of Houston, an understanding of the campus-specific response mechanisms and legal avenues is critical:

• Report Immediately: If you suspect hazing, report it to the UH Dean of Students office or UHPD. Use their online reporting forms or anonymous hotlines.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: As always, screenshot any digital communications (GroupMe, texts, social media), photograph injuries, and keep meticulous notes of all relevant details.
• Understand Prior Incidents: When considering legal action, research any prior complaints or violations against the specific fraternity or organization at UH. While public detail can be limited, an experienced attorney can often uncover this crucial information.
• Consult Houston-Based Hazing Experts: Given UH’s location, a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases can navigate the local law enforcement, court systems, and university bureaucracies more effectively. Our firm’s deep roots in Houston provide us with unique insights into the legal landscape here.

Texas A&M University

Distance from Clay County: Approximately 210 miles southeast of Clay County. Many Clay County families have strong ties to Texas A&M and its traditions.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M University in College Station is renowned for its deeply ingrained traditions, unwavering school spirit, and the strong sense of community that defines the “Aggie Network.” The university hosts a large and active Greek life, comprising IFC fraternities, Panhellenic sororities, Multicultural Greek Council (MGC) organizations, and National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) chapters. Beyond Greek life, the Corps of Cadets stands as a central pillar of A&M culture, known for its military-style environment, rigorous discipline, and challenging traditions. Both Greek organizations and the Corps have unfortunately been sites of hazing incidents over the years, often under the guise of “tradition” or “earning your Aggie Ring.”

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M unequivocally prohibits hazing in its Student Conduct Code. The policy aligns with state law, defining hazing broadly to include any mental or physical endangerment for initiation or membership. A&M provides various reporting mechanisms through its Student Conduct Office, the Dean of Student Life, the Corps of Cadets leadership (for Corps-related incidents), and the University Police Department (UPD). Anonymous reporting channels are also available to encourage students to come forward without fear of retaliation.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced several significant hazing allegations:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit (Circa 2021): In a deeply disturbing case, two pledges of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity at Texas A&M alleged brutal hazing that included being covered in various substances, notably industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in the pledges suffering severe chemical burns requiring skin graft surgeries. The pledges subsequently sued the fraternity for $1 million, the local chapter was suspended by the university for two years, and the national organization faced intense scrutiny. This case underscores the dangers of non-alcohol related physical hazing, which can leave permanent scars.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit against Texas A&M, alleging degrading and abusive hazing during his time in the Corps. His claims included enduring simulated sexual acts and being bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million in damages, highlighting the severe emotional and psychological trauma that can result from even non-fatal hazing. Texas A&M responded by stating it handled the matter under its existing rules and disciplinary processes. This incident, while distinct from Greek life, demonstrates that hazing can be deeply entrenched in other esteemed campus traditions.

These incidents, and others not publicly detailed, reflect the ongoing struggle that A&M, like many universities, faces in eradicating hazing. The university’s official actions, often involving suspensions and disciplinary measures, are a response to a persistent issue that sometimes flies under the radar in an environment championing strong traditions.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at Texas A&M, law enforcement investigations could involve the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) and/or the College Station Police Department (given A&M’s strong ties to Bryan-College Station). Civil lawsuits would typically fall under the jurisdiction of the courts in Brazos County, where College Station is located. This means Clay County families would navigate legal proceedings in Bryan, Texas.

Potential defendants in A&M hazing cases are broad, including the individual student perpetrators, specific officers or leaders within the local chapter or Corps unit, the local chapter itself, the national fraternity/sorority organization, and potentially Texas A&M University (which, as a public institution, benefits from some sovereign immunity, though exceptions exist for gross negligence or malicious conduct by its employees).

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For Aggies and their families, especially those from Clay County who value A&M’s traditions, addressing hazing requires diligence:

• Report to A&M Authorities: Utilize the Student Conduct Office, Dean of Student Life, or UPD for official reports. For Corps-specific incidents, direct communication to Corps of Cadets leadership during the initial reporting phase can be appropriate, but always document everything.
• Collect and Preserve Evidence: Immediately screenshot all relevant GroupMe messages, texts, videos, and photos. Pay close attention to any “tradition”-related materials or manuals that may contain implicit or explicit directives for new members.
• Understand the “Tradition” Defense: Be wary of attempts to dismiss hazing as “just tradition.” Texas law prohibits acts that endanger health and safety, regardless of historical context.
• Seek Experienced Legal Counsel: Given the unique culture of Texas A&M, and the often sensitive nature of balancing tradition with safety, consulting a law firm with experience in complex campus litigation, including those at public Texas universities, is crucial. Our firm can help navigate the particularities of A&M’s internal processes and state sovereign immunity.

University of Texas at Austin (UT)

Distance from Clay County: Approximately 250 miles south of Clay County. The University of Texas at Austin draws students from all corners of Texas, including Clay County.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin is the flagship institution of the UT System, a massive university known for its vibrant academic and social scene. Its campus is a microcosm of Texas, attracting students from every background. UT boasts one of the largest and most active Greek life systems in the nation, with dozens of fraternities and sororities across its IFC, Panhellenic, Texas Asian Pan-Hellenic Council (TAPC), Multicultural Greek Council (MGC), and NPHC. Beyond Greek life, a multitude of spirit organizations, clubs, and athletic teams also contribute to the campus culture, all of which fall under the university’s anti-hazing policies.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas at Austin has a comprehensive and strict anti-hazing policy, emphasizing a zero-tolerance approach. Their policy aligns closely with Texas state law, broadly defining hazing as any act that endangers a student’s mental or physical health for the purpose of affiliation or membership. UT maintains a relatively high level of transparency regarding hazing incidents, famously publishing a public Hazing Violations webpage (hazing.utexas.edu). This site lists organizations, the nature of their violations, the dates of incidents, and the disciplinary sanctions imposed. Students can report hazing through the Office of the Dean of Students, the Behavior Concerns Advice Line (BCAL), the UT Police Department (UTPD), or various anonymous online reporting forms.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT’s public Hazing Violations page is a valuable resource, showcasing a consistent pattern of incidents and the university’s responses:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (PKA) (2023): The UT chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha (PKA) was sanctioned after new members were directed to consume milk and then perform strenuous calisthenics as a form of hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education, demonstrating a cycle of recurring issues even within organizations nationally recognized for severe hazing incidents.
• Texas Wranglers (Spirit Organization): Even non-Greek organizations face scrutiny. The Texas Wranglers, a well-known spirit organization, has faced disciplinary action in recent years for alcohol-related hazing, forced workouts, and punishment-based practices designed to intimidate new members.
• Recurring Themes: The public records reveal recurring themes of alcohol hazing, forced physical activity, public humiliation, and sleep deprivation across various fraternities, sororities, and student groups at UT. These repeated violations, despite university sanctions, highlight the persistent challenge of eradicating hazing.

UT’s publicly available records, detailing specific violations and outcomes, serve as a unique tool. While they underscore the university’s efforts at transparency and enforcement, they also clearly indicate an ongoing issue, with several organizations repeatedly appearing on the list.

5.3.4 How a UT Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents at UT Austin could trigger investigations by the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) or the Austin Police Department (APD), depending on where the incident occurred and its severity. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in courts within Travis County, where Austin is located. Clay County families seeking legal action for a UT-related hazing incident would thus navigate the Travis County court system.

UT Austin, as a public university, benefits from sovereign immunity under Texas law, which can limit direct lawsuits against the institution itself. However, as noted previously, exceptions apply for gross negligence, Title IX violations, and the ability to sue individual employees in their personal capacity. The wealth of prior violation data on UT’s public log can be a powerful tool in civil litigation, demonstrating a pattern of institutional knowledge and, potentially, negligent oversight that can overcome immunity defenses where applicable.

5.3.5 What UT Students & Parents Should Do

For students at the University of Texas at Austin and their Clay County families, navigating hazing involves leveraging transparency and knowing your rights:

• Consult UT’s Hazing Violations Page: Regularly check hazing.utexas.edu for public records of past incidents involving specific organizations your child is considering joining or is already a part of.
• Report to Dean of Students & UTPD: Utilize the university’s established reporting channels, including the “Report a Concern” forms or direct contact with UTPD for criminal matters.
• Preserve Digital Evidence: Given the prevalence of digital communication on college campuses, prioritize screenshotting all group chats, social media exchanges, and electronic messages that could serve as evidence, whether from pledging or general chapter activities.
• Leverage Prior Violations: If an organization with a history of hazing incidents on UT’s public list is involved, emphasize this pattern to university officials and, if pursuing legal action, to your attorney. This documented history is crucial for establishing knowledge and foreseeability.
• Seek Specialized Legal Advice: An attorney with experience in hazing cases at public Texas universities understands the nuances of sovereign immunity and how to effectively utilize publicly available university records to build a strong civil case.

Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Distance from Clay County: Approximately 110 miles southeast of Clay County. SMU attracts many students from Clay County, as well as the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Southern Methodist University (SMU) is a prestigious private university located in Dallas, Texas. Known for its strong academic programs, beautiful campus, and an active social scene, SMU has a particularly prominent Greek life. Fraternities and sororities, including its Panhellenic Council, IFC, and NPHC chapters, are deeply interwoven into the university’s social fabric. The affluent nature of the campus community and the significant role of Greek organizations mean that hazing, while officially prohibited, can often take subtle and well-hidden forms or occur at private, off-campus residences.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU maintains robust anti-hazing policies that align with Texas state law, explicitly prohibiting any activity that endangers mental or physical health for the purpose of initiation or membership. As a private institution, SMU emphasizes responsible student conduct and the well-being of its students. The university offers various reporting channels, including the Office of Student Life, the Dean of Students, and the SMU Police Department. Anonymous reporting systems, such as their “Real Response” platform, are also in place to encourage students to come forward without fear of retribution.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Like many universities with active Greek systems, SMU has investigated and disciplined chapters for hazing:

• Kappa Alpha Order Incident (2017): In a widely cited incident, the SMU chapter of Kappa Alpha Order was suspended after allegations emerged of severe hazing. Reports indicated that new members were subjected to paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and significant sleep deprivation. The chapter faced an extensive suspension and was placed under strict restrictions on recruiting new members for several years, only fully re-emerging around 2021.
• Ongoing Monitoring: SMU actively monitors its Greek organizations and other student groups. While specific detailed public reports (like UT’s) are less common for private universities, allegations of misconduct, including hazing, do lead to internal investigations and disciplinary actions, which can range from probation to suspension or even permanent removal of a chapter.

These incidents, and SMU’s responses, demonstrate that even in highly selective private institutions, hazing remains a persistent challenge despite strong official policies. The private nature of the university often means that information about specific incidents and outcomes is not as publicly accessible as it would be at a public institution.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at SMU, investigations would typically involve the SMU Police Department and/or the Dallas Police Department, depending on where the incident occurred (on-campus vs. off-campus within Dallas city limits). Civil lawsuits stemming from hazing at SMU would fall within the jurisdiction of the courts in Dallas County. This means Clay County families would pursue legal action in Dallas.

As a private university, SMU generally does not benefit from the same sovereign immunity protections that shield public Texas universities. This can make a direct civil suit against the institution itself a more straightforward path for plaintiffs to pursue. Civil suits can compel discovery, allowing attorneys to uncover internal reports and communications that might not be publicly disclosed. Potential defendants could include individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and SMU itself.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For students at SMU and their Clay County families, understanding the university’s private nature is key to addressing hazing:

• Report Internally and Externally: Utilize SMU’s internal reporting mechanisms, including the Office of Student Life and the confidential “Real Response” system. Simultaneously, or if unsatisfied with the university’s response, be prepared to contact the Dallas Police Department for criminal matters.
• Prioritize Evidence Collection: Like all hazing cases, immediate preservation of digital evidence (group chats, photos, videos) is crucial. Given the prevalence of private residences in the SMU social scene, any evidence of off-campus activities is particularly important.
• Understand Private University Accountability: As a private institution, SMU can be held more directly accountable in civil court compared to public universities bound by sovereign immunity. This means legal avenues against the university itself can be more accessible, and an attorney can compel potentially sensitive internal documents.
• Seek Legal Counsel Promptly: Consulting with an experienced hazing attorney knowledgeable about the nuances of private university litigation is vital. Our firm can help navigate SMU’s policies and pursue avenues for justice against all responsible parties.

Baylor University

Distance from Clay County: Approximately 160 miles southeast of Clay County. Baylor University draws students and families from all over Texas, including Clay County.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University, located in Waco, Texas, is a private Baptist university with a strong religious affiliation and deeply rooted traditions. It operates with a distinct mission and a commitment to faith-based education. Baylor’s campus life includes active Greek fraternities and sororities (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, and other multicultural groups), as well as numerous other student organizations and thriving athletic programs, particularly its high-profile football and basketball teams. The university’s cultural and oversight challenges, particularly in the wake of past scandals involving sexual assault, have placed a heightened focus on student safety and accountability across all campus groups.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University maintains a strict anti-hazing policy that is consistent with Texas state law, broadly prohibiting any act that could endanger a student’s mental or physical health for initiation or membership purposes. The university emphasizes its “zero-tolerance” approach to hazing within its community. Baylor provides official reporting channels through the Division of Student Life, the Department of Student Conduct, and the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD). Confidential reporting options are available to encourage students to come forward with concerns without fear of reprisal.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s journey through significant institutional challenges, including a past high-profile sexual assault scandal primarily involving its football program, has led to increased scrutiny over various forms of misconduct, including hazing.

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): In 2020, 14 players from the Baylor baseball team were suspended following an investigation into hazing allegations. The suspensions were staggered over the early season, impacting the team’s performance. While details of the specific hazing acts were not fully public, the incident highlighted that hazing extends beyond Greek life into even high-profile athletic programs at Baylor.
• Broader Oversight Context: This incident, combined with Baylor’s broader commitment to reforming its oversight and student safety protocols following previous events, signifies a campus culture under intense pressure to eradicate all forms of abusive behavior. The university’s official statements, while consistently reiterating a “zero-tolerance” policy, contrast with ongoing, albeit less frequent, reports of misconduct.

Baylor’s efforts to address comprehensive student safety and conduct issues within its unique religious and athletic context shape how hazing cases are handled and perceived on campus.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at Baylor University, investigations could involve the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) and/or the Waco Police Department, depending on details such as location (on-campus vs. off-campus within Waco). Civil lawsuits arising from hazing at Baylor would typically be filed in courts within McLennan County, where Waco is situated. This means Clay County families would pursue legal action in Waco.

As a private university, Baylor generally does not possess the same sovereign immunity protections afforded to public Texas universities. This means that direct civil litigation against Baylor itself for negligence or other claims is typically more accessible for plaintiffs. The university’s private policies and prior challenges surrounding student safety and institutional accountability would be relevant factors in such legal proceedings. Potential defendants include individual student perpetrators, the local chapter or team, the national organization (if applicable), property owners, and Baylor University itself.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

For students at Baylor University and their Clay County families, awareness of the university’s unique context is important when facing hazing concerns:

• Report through Official Channels: Utilize Baylor’s Division of Student Life and Department of Student Conduct for official reports. For criminal acts, contacting BUPD or Waco PD is appropriate.
• Maintain Meticulous Records: Due to the private nature of the institution, external information can be limited. Therefore, an individual’s personal records – screenshots of communications, photos, and detailed personal accounts – become even more critical for evidence.
• Address Cultural Nuances: Understand that Baylor’s religious affiliation and strong traditions might mean that discussions around hazing on campus can be intertwined with broader values. While “tradition” is no excuse for hazing under Texas law, navigating these cultural sensitivities requires careful consideration.
• Seek Prompt Legal Counsel: An attorney experienced in complex campus litigation, particularly involving private institutions, can provide invaluable guidance. Our firm understands how to leverage legal tools to compel private university records and pursue claims against all responsible parties, including the university, where appropriate.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For Clay County families looking to understand the full scope of hazing liability, it is critical to look beyond the local chapter on a Texas campus and recognize the significant role of national organizations. Many fraternities and sororities operating at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor are not independent entities; they are part of larger, nationwide bodies. This connection is paramount in hazing litigation because the national organization often has oversight, financial ties, and, critically, a history of similar incidents across its chapters.

Why National Histories Matter

When a student belonging to a national fraternity, sorority, or collegiate organization is hazed at a Texas campus, the national organization almost invariably comes into the picture. Here’s why their history matters:

• Foreseeability: National HQs often possess extensive anti-hazing manuals, risk management policies, and mandatory training programs. They develop these precisely because they have a documented history of hazing incidents, including deaths and catastrophic injuries, within their own chapters across the country. If a local Texas chapter repeats a harmful “tradition” that has led to injury or death at another chapter in another state, the national organization can argue it couldn’t foresee such an event. However, an experienced attorney can demonstrate that the national had prior notice and, thus, that the incident was entirely foreseeable.
• Pattern Evidence: Hazing practices tend to be cyclical within national organizations. Certain types of alcohol hazing, specific physical rituals, or even patterns of cover-ups are often seen repeating across disparate chapters of the same fraternity or sorority over years or even decades. Documenting this pattern establishes that the national organization had constructive knowledge of ongoing hazing risks but failed to intervene effectively.
• Duty to Supervise and Intervene: By chartering local chapters, collecting dues, providing advisors, and setting policy, national organizations assume a duty to supervise and regulate their local affiliates. When litigation proves they failed in this duty, particularly following repeated warnings or similar incidents, their liability can be substantial.

The unfortunate truth is that multi-million-dollar settlements in hazing cases often involve compelling national organizations to pay precisely because their pattern of behavior, or inaction, demonstrates gross negligence.

Organization Mapping: Connecting Local Chapters to National Patterns

While we cannot list every single chapter at every Texas university, it is crucial to recognize that many prominent Greek organizations have national histories stained by hazing. Here are examples of how local chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor connect to broader national patterns:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (PKA / Pike): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor. Nationally, PKA has a particularly troubling hazing history. The tragic 2021 death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University, due to forced alcohol consumption during a “Big/Little” night, resulted in a $10 million settlement against Pike national and the university. Other major PKA hazing deaths (e.g., David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois, settled for $14 million) underscore a national pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing and highlight foreseeability for any PKA chapter in Texas.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU. Nationally, SAE has been a leader in hazing deaths, leading to its elimination of the traditional pledge program in 2014. Yet, incidents persist. At Texas A&M, pledges alleged severe chemical burns from substances poured on them (2021 lawsuit). At the University of Texas at Austin, an exchange student alleged assault by members at a party (January 2024), while the national chapter was already under suspension for prior violations. Nationally, a 2023 lawsuit against SAE at the University of Alabama involved a pledge allegedly suffering a traumatic brain injury during a hazing ritual. These incidents demonstrate SAE’s persistent pattern of violent and dangerous hazing, indicating a national negligence that impacts Texas chapters.
• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor. The national organization carries the weight of the Max Gruver (LSU) hazing death in 2017, which led to Louisiana’s felony hazing statute. Gruver died from alcohol toxicity during a forced drinking game. This national shame signals the foreseeability of similar alcohol-related hazing for any Phi Delta Theta chapter in Texas.
• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, and UT. Nationally, Pi Kappa Phi is tragically linked to the Andrew Coffey (Florida State) hazing death in 2017, where a pledge died from profound alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night.” Like other similar incidents, this national event creates a clear warning for any Pi Kappa Phi chapter in Texas, showing a foreseeable risk of certain hazing practices.
• Kappa Alpha Order (KA): Active at Texas A&M and SMU. While not tied to major national fatalities in recent years, KA has a history of hazing suspensions. The SMU chapter was suspended in 2017 after allegations of paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and sleep deprivation. This local incident, alongside similar ones at other universities, illustrates a pattern of physical hazing that raises serious concerns for any KA chapter in Texas.
• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor. Sigma Chi has a national hazing history that includes a $10 million+ settlement for a pledge who alleged physical beatings, forced drugs/alcohol, and psychological torment at the College of Charleston (2024). This showcases their organizational exposure to significant damages from severe hazing.

These examples are not exhaustive lists but rather illustrative points. They demonstrate that when a Texas chapter, whether at UH, A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, engages in hazing that mirrors national patterns, it significantly strengthens claims of foreseeability and prior notice against the national organization.

Tying Back to Legal Strategy: Accountability Beyond the Local Chapter

Understanding these national patterns is not just academic; it profoundly shapes our legal strategy:

• Foreseeability and Negligence: When national organizations have been repeatedly warned about specific hazing practices (like forced alcohol consumption or violent rituals) through prior incidents, lawsuits, or internal reports, they can be held liable for failing to prevent similar incidents in their other chapters. This establishes a baseline of negligence.
• Insurance Coverage Disputes: National fraternities and their insurers often try to
  deny coverage for “intentional acts” or claim they had no knowledge of local chapter misconduct. However, demonstrating a national pattern of hazing can help overcome these arguments, compelling insurers to provide coverage for their national client’s negligence.
• Punitive Damages: In appropriate cases, when national organizations have demonstrated a reckless disregard for the safety of their members by repeatedly ignoring warnings or failing to enforce anti-hazing policies, courts may award punitive damages. These damages are designed to punish the defendant for egregious behavior and deter similar conduct in the future.

For Clay County families whose children have been harmed, our firm meticulously traces these connections between local chapter actions and national organizational histories. This allows us to hold all negligent parties accountable, forcing not just monetary compensation but also vital changes in policy and culture that can prevent future tragedies.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, and Strategy in Hazing Litigation

When hazing strikes, the natural first reaction for Clay County families is often shock, anger, and a desperate desire for immediate answers. Forging a strong legal case, however, requires a methodical approach, focusing on evidence collection, understanding the types of damages that can be recovered, and employing astute legal strategy. This is where the experience of a dedicated hazing attorney becomes invaluable.

The Power of Evidence in Hazing Cases

Hazing often thrives in secrecy, but modern technology has paradoxically made it harder to completely conceal. Compiling a robust collection of evidence is paramount for a successful civil case.

• Digital Communications: These are often the “smoking gun” in modern hazing cases. We meticulously collect and preserve:
  • GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, and fraternity/sorority-specific app messages: These apps are frequently used for planning, coordinating, and documenting hazing. They show leadership directives, peer pressure, and often, explicit details of the hazing.
  • Instagram DMs, Snapchat messages, TikTok comments: These can include direct communications about hazing, threats, or even fleeting photographic or video evidence that can be captured via screenshots before it disappears. We advise preserving both live messages and attempting to recover deleted ones through digital forensics.
• Photos & Videos: Visual evidence is incredibly powerful. This includes:
  • Content filmed by members or pledges during hazing events, often found in group chats, private social media, or personal phones.
  • Surveillance footage from university cameras, Ring doorbells, or other private security systems at houses, event venues, or public spaces can show events leading up to, during, or immediately after hazing.
  • Photographs of injuries, both immediately after the incident and documenting their progression over time. This includes bruises, burns, cuts, and even physical changes due to exhaustion or deprivation.
• Internal Organization Documents: These documents provide crucial insight into the institutional context of the hazing:
  • Pledge manuals, “tradition” books, initiation scripts, or any written materials outlining new member education.
  • Emails or texts from chapter officers, advisors, or national representatives discussing new member activities, particularly if they hint at veiled hazing.
  • National fraternity/sorority policies, risk management guidelines, and training materials can be used to show what the national organization should have done.
• University Records: Accessing university records is key to proving institutional knowledge and negligence:
  • Prior conduct files, probation orders, and suspensions for the same organization can demonstrate a pattern of past hazing and the university’s awareness.
  • Incident reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices related to any prior misconduct.
  • Publicly accessible records, like the University of Texas at Austin’s Hazing Violations webpage, which lists organizations, their violations, and sanctions, are invaluable.
  • Clery reports and other disclosures can show broader patterns of campus safety and misconduct.
• Medical and Psychological Records: These document the extent of the victim’s harm:
  • Emergency room reports, ambulance records, and hospitalization notes detailing injuries, treatments, and toxicology results (e.g., blood alcohol levels, drug screens).
  • Surgery and rehabilitation notes, physical therapy records, and medication lists.
  • Psychiatric or psychological evaluations documenting Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, humiliation, or other forms of emotional distress resulting from the hazing.
• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts and statements from those with direct knowledge are vital:
  • Other pledges, members who participated, or even bystanders (roommates, RAs, coaches, trainers) who observed the incidents or changes in the victim.
  • Former members who previously left the organization or were expelled can often provide valuable insights into ongoing hazing practices or institutional cover-ups.

Understanding Damages: What Families Can Recover

In a civil hazing lawsuit, damages are the monetary compensation sought by victims and their families for the harms they have suffered. These damages fall into several categories:

• Economic Damages: These are quantifiable financial losses:
  • Medical Expenses: Including emergency care, hospitalization, surgeries, ongoing therapy (physical, occupational, psychological), medications, and adaptive equipment. For catastrophic injuries, a “life care plan” can project future medical costs for lifelong care.
  • Lost Income & Educational Impact: Compensation for lost wages (if the victim or a parent had to take time off work), lost scholarships, tuition for missed semesters, delayed graduation, and diminished future earning capacity if the hazing led to permanent disability or psychological trauma affecting their career.
  • Other Economic Losses: This can include property damage (such as a destroyed phone or personal items during hazing) or relocation costs if the victim had to transfer schools due to the trauma.
• Non-Economic Damages: These compensate for subjective, non-financial harms, which are equally real and often profound:
  • Physical Pain & Suffering: For the pain endured from injuries, ongoing chronic pain, and the loss of physical abilities (e.g., inability to play sports or engage in hobbies).
  • Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: For the severe mental anguish, PTSD, anxiety, depression, humiliation, shame, loss of dignity, and the profound loss of trust that often accompanies hazing.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: Compensates for the inability to participate in activities and experiences that once brought joy, leading to withdrawal from social life and the overall college experience.
• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): When hazing tragically results in death, certain surviving family members (typically spouses, children, and parents) can recover:
  • Funeral and Burial Costs.
  • Loss of Financial Support: If the deceased would have contributed financially to the family.
  • Loss of Companionship, Love, Society, and Guidance: For the profound grief and emotional suffering of loved ones.
  • Parents’/Siblings’ Mental Health Treatment: For the therapy and counseling needed to cope with the traumatic loss.
• Punitive Damages: In cases where defendants acted with extreme recklessness, malice, or gross negligence, courts may award punitive damages. These are not meant to compensate the victim but to punish the defendants and deter similar future conduct. Texas law allows for punitive damages, often capped, but they can be a significant motivator for defendants to settle or make serious reforms.

It is crucial to understand that while we meticulously calculate and pursue these types of damages, the exact outcome depends on the specific facts of each case, available evidence, and the legal strategies employed. Our firm has achieved multi-million dollar results in cases of wrongful death and catastrophic injury, demonstrating our capability to pursue high-value claims.

The Role of Different Defendants and Navigating Insurance Coverage

Hazing cases are frequently complicated by the involvement of multiple defendants, each with their own legal counsel and, importantly, their own insurance policies.

• Insurance Coverage: National fraternities, universities, and individual parties typically carry various insurance policies (e.g., general liability, directors & officers, homeowners). These policies are designed to protect them financially against lawsuits.
• Challenging Exclusions: Insurers, however, often attempt to deny coverage for hazing incidents, claiming that “intentional acts” or “criminal conduct” are excluded from their policies. They may also argue that a policy doesn’t cover a specific defendant or that the incident occurred off-premises.
• Experienced Hazing Lawyers: Our firm, with Lupe Peña’s invaluable background as a former insurance defense attorney, understands these tactics intimately. We know how to:
  • Identify all potential sources of insurance coverage, leaving no stone unturned.
  • Navigate complex disputes over policy exclusions, arguing, for instance, that while the direct hazing act might be intentional, the national organization’s gross negligence in supervision is a covered negligent act.
  • Force insurers to defend their clients, leading to greater leverage in settlement negotiations.
  • Pursue “bad faith” claims against insurers who wrongfully deny valid coverage.

The legal strategy involves methodically identifying every responsible party, meticulously building evidence against each, and expertly navigating the complex world of insurance to maximize victim recovery and secure true accountability.

Practical Guides & FAQs: Taking Action Against Hazing

For Clay County families and students impacted by hazing, knowing what to do, who to trust, and what questions to ask can feel overwhelming. This section provides immediate, actionable advice and answers to common questions.

For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

As a parent, your intuition is a powerful tool. Pay attention to subtle shifts in your child’s behavior.

Warning Signs of Hazing

• Unexplained Injuries or “Accidents”: Mysterious bruises, burns, cuts, or sprains, especially if your child is vague about how they happened or their explanations don’t quite add up.
• Extreme Fatigue & Sleep Deprivation: Your child is constantly exhausted, appearing to get very little sleep, often attributed to “late-night meetings” or “mandatory events.”
• Drastic Changes in Mood or Behavior: Sudden anxiety, depression, irritability, withdrawal from normal activities, or an unusual level of secrecy about their group’s activities. They might become defensive when asked direct questions.
• Obsessive Phone Use or Fear of Missing Communication: Constant checking of group chats, anxiety when their phone pings, or a palpable fear of missing a “mandatory” text or call.
• Physical Changes: Sudden weight loss or gain, an unkempt appearance, or signs of stress (e.g., changes in eating habits).
• Forced Servitude or Unexplained Expenses: Your child is constantly running errands for older members, cleaning their rooms, or frequently asking for money for “fines” or “group activities” without clear explanation.

How to Talk to Your Child

Approach your child with empathy and without judgment.

• Start with Open-Ended Questions: “How are things really going with the fraternity/sorority?” or “What’s been the best and worst part of the new member process?”
• Emphasize Safety Over Status: Make it clear that your child’s health and well-being are your absolute priority, far above any perceived loyalty to a group or fear of missing out.
• Reassure Them of Support: Let them know you will support them no matter what, and that you will protect them from any repercussions if they choose to leave or report.

If Your Child is Hurt or in Danger

• Seek Immediate Medical Care: If your child is injured, disoriented, or intoxicated, call 911 immediately. Do not delay. Prioritize their medical needs over concerns about getting “in trouble.” Most states, including Texas, have good-faith reporting protections that shield individuals who call for help in an emergency, even if underage drinking was involved.
• Document Everything Meticulously: This cannot be overstressed. Photograph any injuries (multiple angles, for scale). If your child shows you any digital evidence (texts, GroupMe chats, DMs), screenshot them immediately and back them up. Write down everything your child tells you while their memory is fresh—who, what, when, where, and what was said.
• Save Everything: Preserve clothing worn during the incident, any receipts for forced purchases, or any physical objects used in the hazing.

Dealing with the University

• Document All Communication: Keep a detailed log of every email, phone call, and meeting with university administrators. Note the date, time, who you spoke with, and what was discussed.
• Ask Direct Questions: Inquire about the university’s anti-hazing policies, their investigative procedures, and any prior incidents involving the organization in question.
• Do Not Let Them Control the Narrative: Universities often prioritize protecting their reputation. Do not feel intimidated into accepting their version of events or their proposed internal “solution” without legal review.

When to Talk to a Lawyer

Contacting an attorney is a crucial step if you suspect hazing, even if you’re unsure about filing a lawsuit.

• Significant Harm: If your child has suffered significant physical injuries, enduring psychological trauma, or has been in a situation where their life was endangered.
• University or Organization Stonewalling: If the university or the organization appears to be minimizing, covering up, or actively impeding the search for truth.
• Evidence Preservation: An attorney can immediately issue cease and desist letters, open investigations, and prepare subpoenas to preserve crucial evidence that organizations and individuals might attempt to destroy.

For Students / Pledges: Self-Assessment & Safety Planning

You are not alone, and you have rights. Your health and safety matter more than any group affiliation.

Is This Hazing or Just “Tradition”?

Ask yourself:

• Am I being forced or pressured to do something I genuinely don’t want to do?
• Would I do this if I had a real choice, without fear of social exclusion or punishment?
• Is this activity dangerous, degrading, embarrassing, or illegal?
• Would the university or my parents approve if they knew exactly what was happening?
• Are older members making new members do things they don’t have to do themselves?
• Is this “tradition” really about initiation, or is it just fun for older members at my expense?
• Am I being told to keep secrets, lie, or hide this from outsiders, including university officials?

If you answered YES to any of these questions, it is very likely hazing. Your “consent” under these circumstances is not true consent.

Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story

Under Texas Education Code § 37.155, consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts and universities recognize the immense power dynamics at play. When a new member is desperate to fit in, facing social pressure, and fears exclusion, their “agreement” to participate is often coerced, not voluntary. You cannot legally consent to an illegal act or to being harmed.

Exiting and Reporting Safely

• Get to Safety First: If you are in immediate danger (intoxicated, injured, threatened), call 911 or campus police immediately. Most campuses and Texas law protect you if you are seeking help in an emergency.
• You Have the Right to Leave: You can “de-pledge” or leave the organization at any time. You do not need their permission. You can send a brief email or text stating, “I am resigning my pledge/membership effective immediately.”
• Do Not Attend “One Last Meeting”: If you decide to leave, avoid meeting with the group one last time, as this can lead to further pressure or intimidation.
• Report Threats: If you fear retaliation, report that fear immediately to the Dean of Students, campus police, or the local police department. Harassment and stalking are crimes, and protective orders can be sought.

Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty

Texas law and many university policies offer amnesty or immunity for individuals who report hazing incidents in good faith or seek medical help in an emergency, even if they were consuming alcohol underage or were involved in the hazing themselves. Your safety and the safety of others take precedence over minor disciplinary actions.

For Former Members / Witnesses: A Path to Accountability

If you were once part of a hazing organization or witnessed hazing, and now feel guilt, fear, or a desire to do the right thing, you have options.

• Your Testimony Matters: Your insider knowledge and testimony can be crucial in preventing future harm and holding those responsible accountable. You could help save lives.
• Seek Legal Advice: You may face your own legal exposure (criminal or civil) if you participated in hazing. It is wise to seek confidential legal advice from an attorney regarding your rights and potential liabilities. A lawyer can help navigate your role as a witness or advise you on the best path forward for cooperation with authorities or victims’ counsel.
• Cooperation Can Be a Mitigating Factor: In some criminal contexts, cooperation with authorities regarding hazing incidents can be considered during sentencing. In civil cases, providing honest testimony can support an ethical commitment to justice.

Critical Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Hazing Case

The moments immediately following a hazing incident are critical. Unfortunately, many Clay County families and students, acting out of fear, loyalty, or ignorance, make mistakes that can severely damage a potential legal case. Avoid these common pitfalls:

1. Letting Your Child Delete Messages or “Clean Up” Evidence:
   • What Parents Think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble; let’s delete the embarrassing stuff.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: Deleting incriminating evidence can be seen as a cover-up, potentially lead to obstruction of justice charges, and makes proving your case nearly impossible. Digital forensics can often recover deleted messages, but original, unedited screenshots are gold.
   • What to Do Instead: Preserve everything immediately, even if it feels embarrassing or incriminating. Your attorney will help sort through relevance.
2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly:
   • What Parents Think: “I’m going to go down there and give them a piece of my mind.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: This alerts the organization. They will immediately lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare an aggressive defense against you. You lose the element of surprise.
   • What to Do Instead: Document every detail privately. Then, call an experienced hazing lawyer before any confrontation.
3. Signing University “Release” or “Resolution” Forms Without Legal Review:
   • What Universities Do: They may pressure families to sign waivers, non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), or internal “resolution” forms.
   • Why It’s Wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue a civil lawsuit for significant damages. University settlements are often far below the true value of your case.
   • What to Do Instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or its legal representatives without first having an attorney review and approve it.
4. Posting Details on Social Media Before Talking to a Lawyer:
   • What Families Think: “I want everyone to know what happened and warn others.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: Defense attorneys scour social media. Inconsistent statements, emotional posts, or publicly revealing details can be used against your child’s credibility, harm the case’s value, and potentially waive legal privileges.
   • What to Do Instead: Document everything privately and share it only with your attorney. Let your lawyer control any public messaging strategically.
5. Letting Your Child Go Back for “One Last Meeting” with the Group:
   • What Hazing Groups Say: “Just come talk to us before you do anything drastic; we want to hear your side.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: This is an intimidation tactic. They will pressure your child, attempt to discredit their story, or extract statements that can be used against them in a legal context.
   • What to Do Instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication with the organization should typically go through your attorney.
6. Waiting “to See How the University Handles It Internally”:
   • What Universities Promise: “We’re investigating, let us handle this internally to avoid public scandal.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: While universities conduct internal investigations, these prioritize institutional reputation, not necessarily victim compensation or maximum accountability. Evidence disappears rapidly, witnesses graduate, and valuable time to file a lawsuit (the statute of limitations) runs out.
   • What to Do Instead: Preserve all evidence immediately. Consult a lawyer without delay. You can pursue both university discipline and civil justice simultaneously.
7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer:
   • What Adjusters Say: “We just need your statement to process the claim; we’re here to help.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: Insurance adjusters represent the insurance company’s interests, not yours. Recorded statements can be used against you, and early settlement offers are almost always lowball.
   • 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 Austin) have some sovereign immunity protections under Texas law, meaning they are generally shielded from certain lawsuits. However, exceptions exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, Title IX violations, and when suing individual employees in their personal capacity. Private universities (such as SMU and Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections, potentially making lawsuits against the institution more direct. 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. Under Texas Education Code, hazing is classified as a Class B misdemeanor by default. However, it escalates to a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals in leadership roles within an organization can also face misdemeanor charges for failing to report hazing.
• “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. Courts and legal experts understand that “agreement” under immense peer pressure, fear of exclusion, and power imbalances often does not constitute true, voluntary consent. You cannot consent to an illegal act or to being recklessly harmed.
• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”
  Generally, there is a 2-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death to file a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit in Texas. However, certain legal principles, such as the “discovery rule” (if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known) or fraudulent concealment (if defendants actively hid the hazing), may extend this period. If the victim was a minor, the statute of limitations may be paused until they reach adulthood. Time is absolutely critical in hazing cases – evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations may destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to protect your rights. Our video on the statute of limitations at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c provides additional context.
• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of the hazing does not necessarily eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities or sororities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship of the organization, their control over its members (even off-campus), their prior knowledge of hazing, and whether such incidents were foreseeable. Many major hazing cases that resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments (like the Pi Delta Psi retreat death or the Sigma Pi unofficial house death) occurred off-campus.
• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  We understand the profound concern for privacy. Most hazing cases, particularly civil lawsuits, are settled confidentially before reaching a public trial. Your legal team can request sealed court records and negotiate confidential settlement terms to protect your child’s identity and privacy. Our priority is to achieve accountability and justice while respecting your family’s wishes regarding public disclosure. Rest assured, we prioritize your family’s privacy while pursuing accountability.
• “How much does it cost to hire a hazing lawyer?”
  At The Manginello Law Firm, we typically handle serious injury and wrongful death cases, including hazing claims, on a contingency fee basis. This means you pay no attorney fees upfront, and we only get paid if we win your case. Our fees are a percentage of the recovery we achieve for you. This allows families, regardless of their financial situation, to pursue justice against powerful institutions. Our video explaining contingency fees at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc provides more detail.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces the profound trauma of a hazing incident, especially one involving a complex network of individuals, powerful national organizations, and well-resourced universities, you need more than just a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who intimately understand the intricate dynamics of campus abuse, how powerful institutions fight back, and how to rigorously pursue accountability—and win.

At The Manginello Law Firm, operating as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, we bring an unparalleled depth of experience to hazing litigation in Texas. From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including those here in Clay County, and across the Texas Panhandle who send their children to our state’s universities. We understand that hazing at Texas universities impacts families far and wide, and our reach extends to cover all those affected.

Our firm’s unique qualifications make us exceptionally well-suited to navigate these challenging cases:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable perspective. 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, their arguments for coverage exclusion, and their settlement strategies. In essence, we know their playbook because we used to run it, giving us a significant strategic edge in securing maximum compensation for our clients. Learn more about Lupe Peña’s background at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Our managing partner, Ralph P. Manginello, has a proven track record of taking on some of the largest corporations and institutions. He was involved in the complex BP Texas City explosion litigation, a testament to his ability to handle cases against massive defendants with deep pockets. His federal court experience (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) means we are not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their formidable defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won. We know how to fight powerful defendants and leverage our experience for your family. Ralph Manginello’s complete credentials and case history are detailed at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: Hazing litigation often involves tragic wrongful death or catastrophic, life-altering injuries. Our firm has a proven track record in complex wrongful death cases, working with economists to meticulously value loss of life and secure multi-million dollar results. We have extensive experience valuing lifetime care needs for victims with severe brain injuries or permanent disabilities. We don’t settle cheap. We build cases that force genuine accountability. Our comprehensive experience is highlighted on our wrongful death page at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/.
• Dual Criminal and Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides a distinct advantage. He understands how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation, which is crucial when hazing leads to criminal investigations. This expertise allows us to provide comprehensive guidance, advising witnesses, former members, or even those facing charges on how to navigate overlapping criminal and civil exposures. Our criminal defense capabilities are detailed at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/.
• Investigative Depth: We pride ourselves on thorough investigation. This means leveraging a broad network of experts: medical professionals, digital forensic specialists (to recover deleted messages), economists, and psychologists. We know how to uncover hidden evidence, including subpoenaing national fraternity records, exposing prior incidents, and gaining access to critical university files through tenacious discovery and public records requests. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

We understand how fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments actually work behind closed doors and the cultural pressures that allow hazing to persist. We know how to strategically tackle powerful institutional defendants, how to win insurance coverage disputes, and how to balance victim privacy with the need for public accountability. Our approach is rooted in empathy for your family’s plight, coupled with an aggressive pursuit of justice. Our job is to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family.

Get a Confidential, No-Obligation Consultation Today

If hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone. Families in Clay County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers, accountability, and justice. Whether your child attends Texas A&M, UT Austin, UH, SMU, Baylor, or any other institution in Texas, we want to hear from you.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm today for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We will listen to your story without judgment, review any evidence you have, explain your legal options clearly, and help you decide on the best path forward for your family.

What you can expect from your free consultation:

• We will listen to your experience with compassion and without judgment.
• We will review any evidence you may have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• We will explain your legal options, including the possibility of a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• We will discuss realistic timelines and what to expect during the legal process.
• We will answer all your questions about our contingency fee structure – meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case. Our video explaining contingency fees at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc can provide further details.
• There will be no pressure to hire us on the spot. We want you to take the time you need to make an informed decision.
• Everything you tell us is strictly confidential.

To reach the Legal Emergency Lawyers™:

• 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 consultation in Spanish. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

Whether you’re in Clay County, the Texas Panhandle, 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