The Ultimate Guide to Hazing in Texas: Protecting Cottle County Families from Campus Abuse

The phone rings late. It’s your child, a freshman at a Texas university, their voice strained, hesitant. They tell you about “initiation night” at an off-campus fraternity house. Your child, along with other pledges, was pressured to drink far beyond safe limits, endure degrading acts, and participate in extreme physical tasks. Other students laugh, chanting, filming on their phones. Then, someone collapses, falls, or vomits, but no one wants to call 911 because they fear “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble.” Your child feels trapped between loyalty to the group and their own safety, or worse, they are the one who is hurt.

This isn’t a scene from a movie; it’s a terrifying reality for countless families. It could happen at any Texas university—including those where Cottle County families send their children, whether it’s one of the major state universities or a smaller private institution. Many parents and students in our close-knit communities across Cottle County might feel miles away from the complexities of campus life, but the truth is, hazing can affect anyone.

This comprehensive guide offers an in-depth look at hazing and the law in Texas, specifically designed for families in Cottle County and across the state. We’ll explain:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, far beyond the old stereotypes.
• How Texas and federal law address hazing incidents.
• Valuable lessons from major national cases and how they apply to families in Texas.
• The concerning patterns observed at major Texas universities like the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University.
• The legal options and pathways to justice that victims and their families in Cottle County and throughout Texas may have.

While this article provides general information, it is not specific legal advice. Every case has unique facts and circumstances. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, is dedicated to evaluating individual cases and stands ready to serve families throughout Texas, including those right here in Cottle County, who are dealing with the devastating impact of hazing.

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, time is critical:

• Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.” Prioritize their health.
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages immediately.
  • Photograph injuries from multiple angles, ensuring timestamps are visible.
  • Save any physical items like clothing, receipts for forced purchases, or objects linked to the hazing.
• Write down everything while memory is fresh: who, what, when, where, and any relevant dialogue.
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity, sorority, or organization directly.
  • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal counsel.
  • Post details about the incident on public social media platforms.
  • Allow your child to delete messages or “clean up” any evidence.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

• Evidence disappears fast—deleted group chats, destroyed paddles, coached witnesses.
• Universities often move quickly to control the narrative and manage public perception.
• We can help preserve evidence, protect your child’s rights, and guide you through these critical first steps.
• Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for an immediate, confidential consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

The image of hazing often conjures outdated stereotypes—perhaps mild pranks or silly initiation rituals. However, modern hazing is far more sinister and dangerous. In 2025, it’s defined as any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, keeping membership, or gaining status in a group, where the behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits. It’s crucial to understand that merely saying “I agreed to it” does not automatically make the activity safe or legal when there’s an inherent power imbalance and immense peer pressure.

For Cottle County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or campus organizations, these tactics can be shocking. They are designed to exploit vulnerability, build a sense of forced loyalty, and often involve multiple layers of physical, psychological, and digital abuse.

Main Categories of Hazing

Hazing manifests in various forms, each designed to strip individuality and enforce submission.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is one of the most common and deadliest forms.

  • Forced or coerced drinking: Pledges are often made to consume excessive amounts of alcohol in short periods. This can involve chugging challenges, “lineups” where drinks are consumed one after another, or drinking games where mistakes or incorrect answers result in mandatory consumption.
  • Pressured consumption of unknown substances: This can also involve being pressured to consume various substances with unknown effects, dangerously mixing different types of alcohol or even drugs.

• Physical Hazing: These acts typically cause direct bodily harm or extreme discomfort.

  • Paddling and beatings: Deliberate physical attacks, often with objects like paddles, but also including punches, kicks, and slaps.
  • Extreme calisthenics or “workouts”: Grueling physical exercises that go far beyond healthy conditioning, often performed to exhaustion or injury, sometimes referred to as “smokings.”
  • Sleep and food/water deprivation: Forcing new members to stay awake for extended periods, restricting access to meals or water, leading to severe fatigue and physical strain.
  • Exposure to extreme environments: Leaving pledges in excessively cold or hot conditions, or dangerous outdoor environments without proper gear or supervision.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These acts are profoundly degrading and can have lasting psychological impacts.

  • Forced nudity or partial nudity: Requiring pledges to strip or engage in acts of public or private partial nudity.
  • Simulated sexual acts: Forcing individuals to perform or simulate sexual acts with other members or objects, such as “roasted pig” positions or “elephant walks.”
  • Degrading costumes or behaviors: Requiring pledges to wear embarrassing outfits in public or perform humiliating stunts, often with racial, sexist, or homophobic overtones through slurs or role-play.

• Psychological Hazing: This attacks an individual’s mental and emotional well-being.

  • Verbal abuse, threats, and isolation: Constant yelling, insults, derogatory language, making threats, or intentionally isolating new members from friends and family.
  • Manipulation or forced confessions: Coercing pledges to reveal personal secrets, or engage in acts against their moral compass.
  • Public shaming: Humiliating individuals in front of others or spreading embarrassing information via social media or during group meetings.

• Digital/Online Hazing: With the ubiquity of smartphones and social media, hazing has moved into the digital realm.

  • Group chat dares and humiliation: Using platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, or Discord to pressure members into performing embarrassing acts, share inappropriate content, or engage in digital bullying.
  • Pressure to create or share compromising images/videos: Forcing pledges to record or appear in degrading content that can then be circulated.
  • Constant monitoring and communication: Demanding instant responses at all hours, using location tracking apps, or controlling social media posts.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is unfortunately not unique to specific types of organizations; it pervades a wide array of student groups, including:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes social organizations listed under Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and various multicultural Greek councils.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: These groups, renowned for their discipline, can also fall prey to dangerous “traditions” that cross the line into hazing.
• Spirit Squads and Tradition Clubs: Organizations like spirit groups, cheerleading squads, and long-standing student clubs (such as those associated with university traditions like the Texas Cowboys at UT) can develop hazing practices.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to baseball, track and field, and cheerleading squads, hazing can occur within team settings, often under the guise of “team bonding” or “toughening up” new members.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups like marching bands, theater groups, and other performing arts ensembles have been found to engage in hazing.
• Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: Any group with an initiation process or a hierarchical structure can foster hazing environments.

Social status, the desire to uphold “tradition,” and a pervasive culture of secrecy are key factors that allow these harmful practices to persist, even when participants know that hazing is illegal and dangerous. For Cottle County families, it’s vital to recognize that your child could face hazing risks in almost any campus organization.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape around hazing in Texas is crucial for Cottle County families. The law provides clear definitions, penalties, and pathways for accountability.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has comprehensive anti-hazing provisions outlined in the Texas Education Code, specifically Chapter 37, Subchapter F.
In plain terms, hazing is broadly defined as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student, that:

• Endangers the physical health or safety of a student (e.g., beating, forced exercise, forced consumption of alcohol or drugs).
• OR Substantially affects the mental health or safety of a student (e.g., extreme humiliation, intimidation, psychological manipulation).
• AND occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation, affiliation, holding office, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

Key points for Cottle County families:

• Location is irrelevant: Hazing can happen on or off campus; the law applies regardless of where the acts occur.
• Mental or physical harm: The harm doesn’t have to be physical; severe psychological distress can also constitute hazing.
• Intent is broad: “Reckless” behavior is enough. This means if someone knew (or should have known) the risks involved and proceeded anyway, they can be held responsible.
• “Consent” is not a defense: Critically, Texas law explicitly states that a victim’s “consent” to the activity is not a defense to a hazing charge. This recognizes that true consent is often impossible under conditions of peer pressure and power imbalances.

Criminal Penalties: Hazing carries significant criminal penalties in Texas:

• By default, hazing is a Class B Misdemeanor (punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a fine up to $2,000).
• It escalates to a Class A Misdemeanor if the hazing causes bodily injury requiring medical attention.
• Most severely, hazing that causes serious bodily injury or death is classified as a State Jail Felony, carrying a potential sentence of 180 days to two years in state jail, in addition to fines.

Furthermore, individuals, including officers or members of an organization, can face misdemeanor charges for failing to report hazing if they knew about it and didn’t act. Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor.

This legal framework demonstrates Texas’s serious stance on hazing, reflecting the profound harm it causes. While the law is technical, this summary underlines the direct legal consequences for individuals and organizations involved.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

It’s important for Cottle County families to understand the distinction between criminal and civil legal actions related to hazing. These two types of cases serve different purposes and operate independently.

• Criminal Cases:

  • These are brought by the state (through a prosecutor) against individuals or organizations accused of violating hazing laws or other related criminal statutes.
  • The aim is to punish the accused through penalties like jail time, fines, or probation.
  • Common hazing-related criminal charges can include the specific hazing offenses outlined in the Texas Education Code, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, or even manslaughter or negligent homicide in fatal incidents.
  • The burden of proof in criminal cases is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” a high standard.

• Civil Cases:

  • These are initiated by victims of hazing or their surviving family members (plaintiffs) against those they believe are responsible for the harm they suffered (defendants).
  • The aim is to obtain monetary compensation for the victim’s injuries and losses, and to hold responsible parties accountable.
  • Civil lawsuits often focus on legal theories such as negligence, gross negligence, wrongful death, negligent hiring or supervision, premises liability concerns, and claims for emotional distress.
  • The burden of proof in civil cases is “by a preponderance of the evidence,” which is a lower standard than in criminal cases.

Critically, a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. Even if no criminal charges are filed or a criminal trial results in an acquittal, a civil case can proceed and succeed. In many instances, both criminal and civil cases may run concurrently, with some overlap in evidence but distinct legal processes and outcomes.

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

Beyond state laws, federal regulations also impact how hazing incidents are addressed, particularly at institutions receiving federal funding.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This significant piece of federal legislation requires colleges and universities that receive federal financial assistance to:

  • Report hazing incidents more transparently: Institutions must publicly disclose all findings of hazing violations and the sanctions imposed.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention: Programs must be implemented to educate students and staff about hazing and its dangers.
  • Maintain public hazing data: Colleges are now mandated to keep and make accessible a public record of hazing incidents, a measure that will be phased in by approximately 2026. This act aims to increase accountability and provide families, including those in Cottle County, with better information when choosing a school.

• Title IX: This federal law prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, or gender-based hostility, it triggers Title IX obligations. Universities must investigate such incidents promptly and equitably, and failure to do so can lead to severe federal penalties, including loss of funding.

• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. Hazing incidents often overlap with categories reported under Clery, especially when they involve assaults, alcohol or drug-related crimes, or other violent acts. This act promotes transparency and offers a baseline of safety statistics for campus communities.

These federal laws create multiple layers of accountability that can be leveraged in hazing cases, particularly when universities fail to uphold their responsibilities.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

For Cottle County families navigating a hazing incident, understanding who can be held liable is critical. Civil lawsuits can target multiple parties, reflecting the complex web of responsibility in campus organizations.

• Individual Students: These are the members who directly planned, supplied alcohol, carried out, or actively participated in the hazing acts. This can also include students who helped cover up the hazing or delayed seeking medical attention.
• Local Chapter/Organization: If the fraternity, sorority, or club is a legally recognized entity, it can be sued directly. This often includes the officers or “pledge educators” who hold positions of authority and oversight within the local group.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters, which sets policies, collects dues, provides guidance, and theoretically supervises local chapters, can often be held liable. Their liability can depend on what they knew (or should have known) about previous hazing incidents, their enforcement of anti-hazing policies, and their general oversight of local chapters.
• University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself may be sued under various legal theories, including negligence and gross negligence. Key factors include the university’s awareness of prior hazing, its enforcement of campus policies, and whether it showed “deliberate indifference” to known risks or patterns of abuse. In Texas, public universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT have some sovereign immunity protection, but exceptions exist, especially for gross negligence or Title IX violations. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer immunity protections.
• Third Parties: Other entities can also be held responsible:
  • Landlords or property owners of off-campus houses or event spaces where hazing occurred, especially if they knew about or allowed dangerous activities.
  • Bars or other alcohol providers that illegally served minors or visibly intoxicated individuals, under “dram shop” laws.
  • Security companies or event organizers who failed to provide adequate safety or oversight.

It’s important to remember that every case is fact-specific; not every party is liable in every situation. Identifying all potentially liable parties requires a thorough investigation by experienced legal counsel.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragic patterns of hazing incidents across the nation often provide crucial insights into legal strategies in Texas cases. These landmark events have not only brought hazing into the national spotlight but have also shaped legal precedents, legislative changes, and accountability standards that apply to our universities and student organizations. Cottle County families should understand these cases, as they highlight common risks and pathways to justice.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Forced alcohol consumption remains the leading cause of hazing fatalities. These cases demonstrate a chilling pattern of coercion, medical neglect, and cover-ups.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): In one of the most widely publicized hazing tragedies, 19-year-old Timothy Piazza died after a “bid-acceptance” event that involved extreme alcohol consumption. Security cameras captured him falling repeatedly, suffering severe head injuries, yet fraternity brothers delayed calling for help for nearly 12 hours. This led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the enactment of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. For Texas readers, this case is a stark reminder that extreme intoxication, deliberate delay in seeking medical attention, and a pervasive culture of silence can lead to devastating legal and human consequences.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old FSU pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event where pledges were given handles of hard liquor. This incident prompted criminal hazing charges against several members and led to FSU temporarily suspending all Greek life, initiating a comprehensive overhaul of its policies. The takeaway here is that formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster, demonstrating national organizations often have knowledge of these harmful patterns.

• Max Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died with a blood alcohol content of 0.495% after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game. Pledges were forced to drink whenever they answered questions incorrectly. This tragedy directly led to Louisiana enacting the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing law. This case exemplifies how legislative change often follows public outrage and clear, undeniable proof of life-threatening hazing practices.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): During a fraternity pledge night, 20-year-old Stone Foltz was forced to consume nearly a full bottle of whiskey, resulting in his death from alcohol poisoning. The aftermath saw multiple criminal convictions against fraternity members. Critically, Bowling Green State University (a public institution) settled with the family for nearly $3 million, with additional multi-million-dollar settlements from the national fraternity and individual members. This case underscores that universities themselves can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside the fraternities involved, even when sovereign immunity might be asserted.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physically brutal and ritualized hazing methods continue to cause severe injury and death.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): At a remote fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains, Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, was subjected to a violent blindfolded “glass ceiling” ritual where he was repeatedly tackled. He suffered fatal head injuries, and help was tragically delayed as fraternity members initially tried to cover up the incident. Multiple members were eventually convicted, and the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted and banned from Pennsylvania for a decade. This case proves that off-campus “retreats” where organizations hide dangerous acts can be as deadly as on-campus events, and national organizations can face severe criminal and civil sanctions for their alleged oversight failures.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not confined to Greek life; it is a pervasive issue that can affect any group with a hierarchical structure, including high-profile athletic programs.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): This case revealed widespread allegations of sexualized and racist hazing within the university’s football program, spanning multiple years. Former players filed multiple lawsuits against Northwestern and its coaching staff, leading to the termination of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed his own wrongful-termination suit (which settled confidentially). This scandal vividly illustrates that hazing extends far beyond Greek life, reaching into major athletic programs and raising critical questions about institutional oversight and responsibility at the highest levels.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies share common, disturbing threads: forced drinking, humiliation, physical violence, deliberate delay or denial of medical care, and persistent cover-up attempts. While these incidents occurred outside of Texas, they establish legal precedents, expose predictable dangers, and empower victims. Reforms and significant multi-million-dollar settlements and verdicts often only follow after immense tragedy compounded by determined litigation.

For Cottle County families facing hazing at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, these national lessons are invaluable. They demonstrate that the fight for accountability is challenging but winnable, and that our Texas courts operate within a legal landscape shaped by these powerful national cases.

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

For families in Cottle County, knowing what has happened at specific Texas universities is crucial. While Cottle County itself may not host a major university, many of our children attend these institutions, and understanding their individual cultures and histories can inform decisions and aid in seeking justice. From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Cottle County and surrounding areas, who navigate the complexities of hazing allegations at these major universities.

University of Houston (UH)

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Houston is a large urban campus, characterized by a vibrant mix of commuter and residential students. Its Greek life is active and diverse, encompassing numerous fraternities and sororities, along with a wide array of student organizations, cultural groups, and sports clubs. As a quickly growing Tier One research institution, UH attracts students from across Texas, including many from communities like Cottle County, who seek a dynamic collegiate experience in the heart of Houston.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UH maintains a clear, strict anti-hazing policy that prohibits any form of hazing, whether it occurs on-campus or off-campus. The policy specifically bans forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and acts causing mental distress as part of initiation or affiliation. UH provides various reporting channels for hazing incidents, including the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). The university also publishes a hazing statement and some disciplinary information on its website, encouraging transparency.

5.1.3 Example Incident & Response

A notable incident involving Pi Kappa Alpha in 2016 shed light on UH’s hazing challenges. Pledges were allegedly subjected to a multi-day event involving deprivation of food, water, and sleep. Tragically, one student sustained a lacerated spleen after reportedly being slammed onto a table or a similar hard surface. This incident led to misdemeanor hazing charges against individuals and resulted in the chapter facing a university suspension.

Further instances of disciplinary action at UH have been documented where fraternities were cited for behavior “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” including alcohol misuse and policy violations, leading to additional suspensions and probations. These examples highlight UH’s stated commitment to addressing hazing through disciplinary measures. While UH is noted for its willingness to suspend chapters, the public access to detailed violation lists remains less comprehensive compared to some other Texas universities.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

In the event of a hazing incident at UH, both the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) and/or the Houston Police Department might be involved, depending on the location of the incident and severity. Families in Cottle County involved in a hazing case at UH would likely find civil suits filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. Potential defendants in such a case could include the individual students involved, the local fraternity chapter, the national fraternity organization, potentially the university itself, and even property owners if the hazing occurred off-campus.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For UH students and their parents, proactive measures are paramount:

• Report hazing immediately through official UH channels such as the Dean of Students, UHPD, or online reporting forms.
• Document any and all prior complaints or incidents involving the organization, which can strengthen future legal claims.
• Consult with a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases to uncover prior discipline, internal university files, and to protect your child’s rights.
• Save all communications from the university regarding the incident, but remember not to sign anything without legal counsel.
• Prioritize medical attention for any injuries, even if seemingly minor, and ensure all care is thoroughly documented.

Texas A&M University

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M University, located in College Station, is deeply rooted in strong traditions, including its renowned Corps of Cadets. This military-style environment, alongside a robust Greek life and numerous other student organizations, cultivates a unique campus culture. Students coming from Cottle County and across the state are drawn to A&M’s strong sense of community and tradition. However, its tradition-heavy atmosphere can, at times, create conditions ripe for hazing under the guise of “earning” one’s place.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M unequivocally prohibits hazing, articulating its stance in comprehensive policies managed through the Division of Student Affairs and its Student Conduct office. The university’s policies cover physical, mental, and humiliating acts, as well as forced alcohol consumption, during any phase of affiliation or membership initiation, both on and off campus. Reporting can be made through the Student Conduct Office, the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD), or via an anonymous reporting hotline.

5.2.3 Example Incidents & Response

Texas A&M has faced significant hazing incidents, highlighting the challenges within both Greek life and the Corps.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit (around 2021): In a harrowing incident, two pledges allegedly suffered severe chemical burns after substances, including an industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, were poured on them during a hazing ritual. The chemical burns required extensive skin graft surgeries. The pledges subsequently sued the fraternity for $1 million, and the chapter faced a two-year suspension from the university. This case starkly demonstrates how traditional “pranks” can escalate into life-altering physical abuse.

• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A lawsuit alleged degrading hazing within the Corps of Cadets, where a cadet was subjected to simulated sexual acts and tied between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The cadet sought over $1 million in damages, and while A&M stated it addressed the matter via its internal rules, the case brought scrutiny to the Corps’ traditions.

These incidents underscore that hazing at Texas A&M occurs across different types of organizations – from Greek life to the highly structured Corps – and often involves a mix of physical and humiliating acts.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

In a hazing case at Texas A&M, the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) or even the Bryan and College Station Police Departments (depending on geographical jurisdiction) could be involved. Civil suits would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Brazos County. Given the strong alumni network and institutional pride, cases often face significant defense strategies from the university and national organizations. Families in Cottle County should be aware that these cases may involve intricate investigations into long-standing traditions.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For Texas A&M students and their parents, especially those from Cottle County, taking these steps is crucial:

• Understand the specific hazing policies of both the university and the Corps of Cadets, which often have their own regulations.
• Report suspicious activities or confirmed hazing immediately to the Texas A&M Student Conduct Office or UPD.
• Document all evidence rigorously, including digital communications, photos of injuries, and any internal documents related to “pledge activities” or “traditions.”
• Seek legal counsel from attorneys experienced in hazing cases who can navigate the complexities of A&M’s unique culture and institutional defenses.
• Do not hesitate to seek medical care for any physical or psychological harm; ensure these visits are thoroughly documented by medical professionals.

University of Texas at Austin (UT)

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin is the flagship institution of the UT System, known for its academic rigor, vibrant campus life, and deep-seated traditions. Students from Cottle County and across Texas are drawn to its diverse culture, which includes a prominent Greek life system and numerous student organizations. UT’s campus environment, while dynamic, has also been a focal point for hazing incidents, leading to significant university oversight and policy responses.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UT Austin maintains a robust anti-hazing policy that strictly prohibits any form of hazing. Like other Texas universities, its policy broadly defines hazing to include acts that endanger mental or physical health for initiation or affiliation purposes, on or off campus. UT is recognized for its proactive approach, including a dedicated public “Hazing Violations and Incidents” page on its website. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD), as well as an anonymous online reporting system.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s transparency efforts have revealed several hazing incidents, illustrating ongoing challenges despite clear policies:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): This fraternity was disciplined after new members were directed to consume milk and engage in strenuous calisthenics, actions found to constitute hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education.
• Spirit and Tradition Organizations: Other groups, such as the Texas Wranglers and certain spirit organizations, have faced sanctions for various hazing violations, including forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, degrading activities, and punishment-based practices.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (2024): This chapter faced a lawsuit seeking over $1 million after an Australian exchange student alleged assault at a fraternity party, resulting in severe orthopedic injuries. The chapter was already under suspension for prior hazing and safety violations.

UT’s public listing of organizations, dates of incidents, types of conduct, and sanctions offers a valuable, transparent record. However, the recurring nature of these violations underscores the persistent nature of hazing.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

In a hazing case originating from UT Austin, the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) and the Austin Police Department would be key law enforcement agencies involved. Any civil lawsuits would fall under the jurisdiction of courts in Travis County. A critical aspect of UT cases is the availability of prior violation records on the university’s public log. These records can significantly buttress civil suits by demonstrating a pattern of hazardous behavior and proving that the university or national organization had prior knowledge of issues with specific chapters or groups. For families in Cottle County whose children attend UT, these detailed records can be invaluable assets in achieving justice.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents connected with UT Austin, these actions are vital:

• Regularly consult UT’s official “Hazing Violations and Incidents” page for specific information on disciplined organizations. This data can inform choices about which groups to join and can serve as crucial evidence.
• Utilize UT’s robust reporting channels, understanding that the university strives for transparency and aims to investigate reports thoroughly.
• Document everything: Leverage UT’s transparency by cross-referencing any personal incidents with publicly available records. Screenshot all relevant digital communications and photograph any injuries.
• Seek legal counsel promptly. An attorney experienced in UT Austin hazing cases can strategically use the university’s own records to build a compelling claim for accountability and compensation.
• Prioritize professional medical and psychological evaluation for any harm suffered, ensuring that hazing is explicitly noted as the cause in medical records.

Southern Methodist University (SMU)

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Southern Methodist University (SMU), situated in Dallas, is a private institution often associated with its affluent student body, prestigious academics, and a vibrant, prominent Greek life. Students from various Texas communities, including families from Cottle County, are drawn to SMU’s strong alumni network and social scene. The university’s culture, while rich in tradition, has also presented challenges regarding student behavior, including hazing incidents within its active fraternity and sorority systems.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU strictly prohibits hazing, outlining its comprehensive policies in the Student Code of Conduct. The university defines hazing to cover any act that endangers the physical or mental health of a student for initiation, affiliation, or membership purposes, regardless of whether it occurs on or off campus. SMU facilitates hazing reporting through various channels, including the Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, and its anonymous reporting systems like “Real Response,” which aims to encourage students to come forward without fear of retaliation.

5.4.3 Example Incident & Response

SMU has had its share of hazing incidents. A notable case involved the Kappa Alpha Order chapter in 2017. New members reportedly faced various hazing activities, including physical acts such as paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and severe sleep deprivation. Following an investigation, the chapter was suspended and placed under strict restrictions on recruiting and social activities for several years. This incident underscored the challenges of enforcing anti-hazing policies even within well-established organizations at private universities.

While SMU aims to promote a safe campus environment, the private nature of the university often means that internal disciplinary actions and reports are not as publicly accessible as those at state-funded institutions. This lack of transparency can make it more challenging for families and prospective students to access a full history of an organization’s conduct.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

In the event of a hazing incident at SMU, the SMU Police Department and Dallas Police Department might be involved. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in courts within Dallas County. Given SMU’s status as a private university, it generally holds fewer immunity protections compared to public institutions. This means that lawsuits can proceed more directly against the university itself, in addition to individual students, local chapters, and national organizations. For families from Cottle County, pursuing a case against SMU or its affiliated organizations would involve navigating complex legal and institutional structures unique to private higher education.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For SMU students and parents from Cottle County, these steps are critical:

• Familiarize yourselves with SMU’s Student Code of Conduct and specific hazing policies, particularly the definition of hazing and the consequences for violations.
• Utilize SMU’s anonymous reporting systems, such as “Real Response,” if you are hesitant to come forward directly, but understand the limitations of anonymity in collecting evidence.
• Document everything rigorously: Given less public transparency from private universities, personal documentation (screenshots, photos, witness contacts) becomes even more crucial to building a case.
• Seek prompt medical and psychological evaluation for any injuries or emotional trauma, ensuring that the hazing context is clearly recorded by healthcare providers.
• Contact experienced legal counsel immediately. An attorney can navigate SMU’s internal processes, compel the university to produce relevant records through discovery, and ensure your rights are protected against powerful institutional defenses.

Baylor University

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University, located in Waco, is the oldest continually operating university in Texas and the largest Baptist university in the world. It boasts a distinct religious identity and a strong emphasis on tradition and community. Students from Cottle County and across Texas are often drawn to Baylor for its academic reputation and faith-based environment. Despite its values-driven mission, Baylor has faced significant scrutiny over major institutional failings, particularly regarding its handling of Title IX issues and sexual assault allegations, which has also brought its broader oversight of student groups into question.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing, articulating its policies within its Student Handbook and through its Student Conduct Administration. Baylor’s definition of hazing aligns with Texas law, encompassing any act that endangers the physical or mental health of a student for the purpose of initiation, membership, or affiliation. Baylor provides various reporting mechanisms, including the Student Conduct Administration, the Baylor Police Department (BUPD), and an online reporting form for anonymous submissions. The university emphasizes a “zero tolerance” approach to hazing.

5.5.3 Select Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s institutional challenges have extended to hazing, showcasing that “zero tolerance” policies require rigorous enforcement:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): An internal investigation into the Baylor baseball program revealed hazing incidents, leading to the suspension of 14 players. The suspensions were strategically staggered over the early season to minimize athletic disruption. This incident highlighted that hazing extends to major athletic programs even within religiously affiliated institutions, and that responses can sometimes prioritize program continuity over radical accountability.

Baylor’s history of broader cultural and oversight challenges, particularly concerning its handling of sexual assault cases and Title IX compliance issues, has led to heightened scrutiny of its student safety protocols. These past incidents underscore the importance of holding the university accountable beyond its official statements and policies.

5.5.4 How a Baylor University Hazing Case Might Proceed

In a hazing incident at Baylor University, the Baylor Police Department (BUPD) and the Waco Police Department might be involved in initial investigations. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in courts located in McLennan County. As a private university, Baylor generally does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it a more direct target for civil litigation compared to public institutions. However, Baylor also has substantial legal resources, and its defenses are often robust. For families from Cottle County whose children attend Baylor, a hazing case would necessitate a thorough understanding of the university’s legal posture and its history of defending institutional liability claims. This specific context demands legal representation that is not only experienced in hazing but also adept at navigating the unique challenges posed by powerful private universities with a history of defending their institutional image.

5.5.5 What Baylor University Students & Parents Should Do

For Baylor students and parents from Cottle County, especially given the university’s unique context, these actions are crucial:

• Review Baylor’s Student Handbook carefully, paying close attention to its specific hazing policies and the definitions of prohibited conduct.
• Utilize Baylor’s official reporting channels, including the Student Conduct Administration or the Baylor Police Department, for any hazing concerns or incidents.
• Document everything meticulously. Given Baylor’s history and the challenges in obtaining internal records, personal documentation—including screenshots, photos, and detailed notes—is paramount.
• Seek medical and psychological help immediately for any physical or emotional harm and ensure that the hazing context is clearly included in all medical records.
• Critically, contact experienced legal counsel promptly. An attorney can help navigate Baylor’s internal processes, understand the interplay of its religious governance and legal obligations, and ensure that credible legal pressure is applied to achieve accountability and compensation. An experienced hazing attorney can cut through the institutional barriers and focus on securing justice.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

When students from Cottle County join fraternities or sororities at Texas universities, they often assume these groups are independent entities tied solely to their campus. However, the vast majority are local chapters of large national organizations. Understanding the long, often troubling, national histories of these groups is crucial, as what happens across the country can directly impact a legal case in Texas.

Why National Histories Matter

Many fraternities and sororities active at campuses like UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor—such as Pi Kappa Alpha, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, or Kappa Alpha Order—are deeply connected to their national headquarters. These national organizations typically:

• Develop extensive anti-hazing manuals and sophisticated risk management policies. They do this not merely out of goodwill but often because they have faced prior lawsuits, multi-million-dollar judgments, and even deaths within their ranks across the country.
• Are aware of specific hazing patterns: the ubiquity of forced drinking nights, the persistence of paddling traditions, and various humiliating initiation rituals that recur across their chapters nationwide.

When a local Texas chapter repeats the very same dangerous acts that led to another chapter being suspended, sued, or even criminally charged in another state, it creates a powerful legal argument for foreseeability. This pattern evidence can be critical in demonstrating that the national organization knew or should have known about the danger, thereby strengthening claims of negligence or supporting arguments for punitive damages against them.

Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

While an exhaustive list of every chapter at every university is impractical here, we can highlight major national fraternities and sororities found at Texas universities and their documented national hazing issues. This information is vital for Cottle County families to understand the broader context.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor. Nationally, Pike has been involved in some of the most tragic hazing incidents. Most notably, the Stone Foltz death at Bowling Green State University (2021) involved massive alcohol consumption, leading to a $10 million settlement for the family. The David Bogenberger death at Northern Illinois (2012) resulted in a $14 million settlement. These cases highlight a dangerous pattern of forced “Big/Little” alcohol nights within the organization, which can then be used to show foreseeability for similar incidents in Texas.
• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU. The fraternity was central to the Timothy Piazza tragedy at Penn State (2017), where a pledge died after intense alcohol hazing and delayed medical care. This case led to landmark criminal prosecutions and substantial civil settlements, emphasizing how widespread institutional negligence can be within this organization.
• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor. Max Gruver’s death at Louisiana State University (2017) after a forced drinking game directly led to Louisiana’s felony hazing law, the Max Gruver Act. This incident established a clear national precedent for extreme alcohol hazing within Phi Delta Theta.
• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin. Andrew Coffey’s death at Florida State University (2017) from acute alcohol poisoning during “Big Brother Night” is a key incident, demonstrating another pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing. Separately, the Chad Meredith drowning death (2001) at the University of Miami, linked to Kappa Sigma, shows the potential for tragic aquatic hazing outcomes that result in multi-million dollar verdicts, showing how Greek Life hazing often crosses organizational lines when it comes to patterns of negligence.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU. SAE has a national history marred by multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries. In recent years, a pledge at the University of Alabama (2023) allegedly suffered a traumatic brain injury from hazing, and at Texas A&M (2021), pledges suffered severe chemical burns requiring skin grafts. The UT Austin chapter faced a lawsuit in 2024 for alleged assault. These patterns demonstrate repeated failures in risk management.
• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor. Beyond the Chad Meredith case, recent allegations at Texas A&M (2023) involve severe injuries like rhabdomyolysis from extreme physical hazing. A 2024 verdict against Sigma Chi at the College of Charleston resulted in over $10 million in damages for severe physical and psychological hazing, reinforcing the significant liability for similar behaviors regardless of which particular fraternity they occur within.
• Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor. This historically Black fraternity has faced hazing allegations, including a recent federal lawsuit at the University of Southern Mississippi (2023) where a former student alleged severe beatings and injuries during “Hell Night.” Early cases, such as the 1997 Joseph Snell case involving an Omega Psi Phi chapter at Bowie State University, resulted in a $375,000 verdict collected by seizing assets nationwide, establishing an important precedent for organizational liability.
• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI): Present at Texas A&M. The most devastating recent case involves Danny Santulli at the University of Missouri (2021), who suffered severe, permanent brain damage from excessive alcohol consumption. His family settled lawsuits with 22 defendants for multi-million dollar amounts, making this one of the most high-profile severe injury hazing cases.
• Sigma Pi (ΣΠ): Present at UH. Collin Wiant died at Ohio University (2018) from hazing-related drug use at an unofficial fraternity house. His death led to Ohio’s felony hazing law, “Collin’s Law: The Anti-Hazing Act.” This case highlights the dangers of drug-related hazing and the liability surrounding unofficial fraternity settings.

This collection of incidents across various national organizations clearly shows that these are not isolated events but rather patterns of dangerous behavior.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

These patterns across states and campuses are not merely historical facts; they are crucial elements in a legal strategy. They demonstrate that certain organizations have received repeated warnings regarding their conduct. In court, we can assess whether national organizations:

• Made meaningful efforts to enforce their anti-hazing policies, or if these policies were mere “paper policies” with no real teeth.
• Responded to prior incidents aggressively enough to deter future misconduct, rather than issuing light penalties that allowed hazing to continue covertly.

This historical context directly influences several critical aspects of a lawsuit:

• Settlement Leverage: A documented history of similar incidents strengthens a plaintiff’s position and can compel national organizations to negotiate more fairly.
• Insurance Coverage Disputes: Such patterns are essential when fighting insurance companies that often try to deny coverage by claiming hazing was an “intentional act” or “unforeseeable.” An experienced attorney understands how to argue that the national organization’s negligence in failing to prevent known patterns should be covered.
• Potential for Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, where an organization’s indifference to repeated warnings and prior tragedies can be shown, courts may award punitive damages. These damages are designed to punish the defendant for reckless or malicious conduct and to deter similar behavior in the future.

For Cottle County families, this means that an alleged incident at a Texas university is not just a local problem but is part of a larger national conversation, and an experienced legal team can connect those dots for maximum impact.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Building a successful hazing case requires meticulous investigation, a comprehensive understanding of the law, and strategic thinking. For families in Cottle County seeking justice, knowing what constitutes strong evidence and what compensation they may be entitled to is crucial.

7.1 Evidence

In the modern era, evidence in hazing cases is multifaceted and often digital. Our firm approaches evidence collection with the understanding that every piece, no matter how small, can contribute to a compelling narrative of accountability.

• Digital Communications: These are often the lifeblood of a hazing investigation. We meticulously collect and analyze:

  • GroupME, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, and fraternity-specific app messages: These frequently contain direct instructions for hazing, discussions about illicit activities, plans for cover-ups, and evidence of power dynamics.
  • Instagram DMs, Snapchat messages (recovered), and TikTok comments: Social media, even disappearing messages, can be critical, as participants often document or discuss hazing activities.
  • Evidence includes both live (screenshots taken by victims/witnesses) and recovered/deleted messages (via forensic analysis).

• Photos & Videos: Visual evidence is incredibly powerful:

  • Content filmed by members: Many hazing incidents are filmed by participants during events for their own entertainment or boasting, creating undeniable proof.
  • Footage shared in group chats or posted on private social media: This can reveal the full scope of the hazing, individuals involved, and the conditions.
  • Security camera footage: From houses, venues, or campus areas can capture events leading up to, during, or immediately after a hazing incident.

• Internal Organization Documents: These can expose the inner workings and historical patterns of a group:

  • Pledge manuals, initiation scripts, “traditions” lists: If these documents endorse or glorify practices that inherently involve hazing, they can be used to prove organizational intent or knowledge.
  • Emails/texts from officers: Communications discussing “what we’ll do to pledges” or planning activities.
  • National policies and training materials: These are crucial in demonstrating what the national organization knew about hazing risks and how they supposedly intended to prevent it versus how it was actually executed.

• University Records: Institutions generate a wealth of documents:

  • Prior conduct files: Records of previous probation, suspensions, warnings, or investigations related to the same organization or individuals.
  • Incident reports: Filed with campus police or student conduct offices.
  • Clery reports and similar disclosures: Publicly available documents on campus crime and safety.
  • Internal emails among administrators: These can reveal what university officials knew or should have known.

• Medical and Psychological Records: Crucial for documenting harm:

  • Emergency room and hospitalization records: Detailing initial injuries, treatments, and the circumstances reported at admission.
  • Surgery and rehabilitation notes: Chronicling ongoing care for severe injuries.
  • Toxicology reports: Essential in cases involving alcohol or drug poisoning.
  • Psychological evaluations: Diagnosing conditions like PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidality directly resulting from hazing.

• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are invaluable:

  • Pledges, members, and former members: Those directly involved or privy to the hazing.
  • Roommates, RAs, coaches, trainers, or bystanders: Individuals who observed changes in behavior, injuries, or knew about the hazing.
  • Individuals who quit or were expelled: Often willing to come forward once they are removed from the immediate pressure of the organization.

For families in Cottle County, evidence collection starts immediately after an incident. We guide families through this process to ensure all potential evidence is secured and properly documented.

7.2 Damages

When hazing causes harm, the law provides pathways for victims and their families to recover compensation. Understanding the types of damages available helps Cottle County families comprehend the full scope of financial and emotional burdens that can be eased through legal action. We always aim to secure the maximum possible compensation for our clients, considering both immediate and long-term impacts.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This covers all costs associated with the physical and psychological injuries caused by hazing:

  • Immediate care: Ambulance fees, emergency room visits, and intensive care unit (ICU) stays.
  • Ongoing treatment: Surgeries, follow-up medical appointments, specialist consultations, and prescription medications.
  • Therapeutic care: Physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy for severe injuries.
  • Long-term care: For catastrophic injuries like traumatic brain injuries (TBI) or organ damage, this can include economists’ projections for lifetime medical needs and specialized care.

• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: Hazing can disrupt a student’s entire future trajectory:

  • Lost income: If the student had to take time off work or could not pursue part-time employment.
  • Deferred or lost education: Missed semesters, withdrawal from school, or a necessary transfer can delay graduation and entry into the workforce.
  • Reduced earning capacity: For permanent injuries that affect physical or cognitive abilities, an economist can calculate the victim’s diminished lifetime earning potential.

• Non-Economic Damages: These address the intangible but profound impacts of hazing:

  • Physical pain and suffering: Compensation for the actual pain experienced from injuries, including chronic pain.
  • Emotional distress and psychological harm: This is often severe in hazing cases, including trauma, humiliation, shame, severe anxiety, depression, terror, and in some cases, lifelong PTSD. Psychological evaluations are crucial for quantifying this.
  • Loss of enjoyment of life: If the victim can no longer participate in hobbies, sports, or social activities they once enjoyed, or if their college experience has been irrevocably diminished.

• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): In the most tragic hazing cases, where a student dies, surviving family members (parents, children, spouse) can claim:

  • Funeral and burial costs.
  • Loss of financial support: Compensation for financial contributions the deceased would have made to the family throughout their life.
  • Loss of companionship, love, and society: This accounts for the profound emotional loss experienced by family members.
  • Grief and emotional suffering: Direct compensation for the emotional devastation caused by the loss of a loved one due to negligence or gross negligence.

It is critical to note that we describe types of damages, not guaranteeing or predicting specific dollar amounts. Every case’s value is unique and depends on its specific facts, the severity of the harm, and the applicable law.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

The process of securing compensation in a hazing case is complex, often involving multiple defendants and intricate battles over insurance coverage.

• Defendants: As outlined earlier, potential defendants can include the individual students involved, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and the university itself (public or private). Each of these entities will typically have its own legal representation and, critically, different insurance policies.
• Insurance Coverage: National fraternities and universities almost universally carry significant insurance policies to protect themselves against liability claims. However, obtaining payouts from these policies is rarely straightforward.
  • Exclusion Arguments: Insurers frequently argue that hazing or “intentional acts” are excluded from coverage. They may claim that policies do not cover “criminal acts” or “intentional torts,” attempting to sever their responsibility.
  • Navigating Disputes: This is where an experienced hazing lawyer becomes indispensable. Our team at The Manginello Law Firm knows how to:
    • Identify all potential sources of coverage: This includes local chapter policies, national organization policies, university umbrella policies, and even the homeowners’ policies of individual students.
    • Strategically dispute exclusions: We argue that even if certain acts were intentional, the core claim often rests on negligence—the national organization’s or university’s negligent supervision, negligent failure to enforce policies, or negligent failure to provide a safe environment. Claims of negligence are typically covered by insurance.
    • Force insurers to defend: Even if coverage is questionable, we often compel insurers to fund the defense, which can lead to more favorable settlement discussions.

Our former insurance defense attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable insider knowledge on how these companies operate, value claims, and attempt to avoid payouts. This expertise is critical in ensuring that the full scope of available insurance resources is identified and pursued, rather than accepting an insurer’s initial denial. For Cottle County families, this strategic legal maneuvering is vital to securing the justice and compensation they deserve from powerful, well-insured opponents.

Practical Guides & FAQs

When hazing strikes, families in Cottle County and students across Texas need immediate, actionable advice. This section provides practical guidance for parents, students, and witnesses, designed to empower action and avoid critical mistakes.

8.1 For Parents: Navigating Suspected Hazing

As a parent, your intuition is your strongest tool. If something feels off, investigate.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert to changes in your child’s behavior or physical well-being:

  • Unexplained injuries or “accidents”: Bruises, burns, cuts that don’t have a logical explanation.
  • Extreme fatigue or sleep deprivation: Constant exhaustion, late-night calls for “mandatory” events.
  • Drastic changes in mood: Increased anxiety, depression, irritability, withdrawal from friends or family.
  • Obsessive phone use: Constantly checking group chats, fear of missing a message or “mandatory” event.
  • Sudden secrecy: Reluctance to talk about fraternity/sorority activities, using phrases like “I can’t talk about it.”

• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not accusation:

  • Ask open-ended questions: “How are things really going with [organization name]?”
  • Avoid judgmental language. Instead, focus on their safety and well-being.
  • Reassure them that you will support them regardless of their choices and that their safety is paramount over any organizational status.

• If Your Child Is Hurt: Act immediately to protect their health and future.

  • Get them medical attention without delay, even if they claim to be “fine.”
  • Document everything: Take clear photos of any injuries (with timestamps) before they heal. Screenshot text messages or social media discussions. Note down what your child tells you, including names, dates, and locations.
  • Preserve physical evidence: Keep any clothing, receipts for forced purchases, or items related to the hazing.

• Dealing with the University: Universities have a vested interest in managing public perception.

  • Document every communication: Keep a detailed record of all emails, calls, and meetings with university officials.
  • Ask specific questions: Inquire about prior incidents involving the same organization and what measures the school took (or didn’t take) in response. This information can be critical to our investigation.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: Don’t delay seeking legal counsel.

  • If your child experiences significant physical or psychological harm.
  • If you feel the university or organization is minimizing, stonewalling, or hiding what truly happened.
  • The sooner you involve an attorney, the quicker crucial evidence can be preserved.

8.2 For Students / Pledges: Self-Assessment & Safety Planning

If you’re a student in Cottle County attending a Texas university, or considering joining a Greek organization or another group, your safety and well-being are paramount.

• Is this hazing or just tradition?

  • Ask yourself: Do you feel unsafe, humiliated, or coerced? Are you forced to drink, endure pain, or perform degrading tasks? Is the activity hidden from faculty, parents, or the public? If you wouldn’t tell your grandmother or the Dean about it, it’s probably hazing. If newer members are doing things that older members don’t have to do, that’s also a strong indicator.

• Why “consent” isn’t the end of the story:

  • You might feel like you “agreed” to it to fit in or gain acceptance. However, Texas law (Education Code § 37.155) explicitly states consent is not a defense to hazing. Power dynamics, intense peer pressure, and the fear of exclusion mean that what looks like “agreement” is often legally considered coercion.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely:

  • Leaving a dangerous situation: Have a plan. Identify a safe friend, an RA, or campus security you can contact. If you’re in immediate danger, call 911.
  • Formally resigning: You have the legal right to leave any organization at any time. A simple text or email to a chapter leader, stating your resignation, can be effective. Avoid meetings where you might be pressured or intimidated.
  • How to report: You can report privately or anonymously. The National Anti-Hazing Hotline (1-888-NOT-HAZE) offers anonymous reporting 24/7. Your university’s Dean of Students Office, Student Conduct, or campus police are also resources.

• Good-faith reporting and amnesty:

  • Texas law and many university policies provide protection for students who report hazing or call for medical help in an emergency, even if underage drinking or other infractions occurred. Your safety, or the safety of another student, is the priority—you will not be penalized for seeking help in an emergency.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses: A Path to Accountability

If you were a former member of an organization where hazing occurred, or you witnessed it, you might be carrying a heavy burden of guilt, regret, or fear.

• Your Role in Preventing Future Harm: Your testimony and any evidence you possess can be vital in preventing similar harm to other students and holding accountable those responsible. Many former members find a sense of healing and purpose by coming forward.
• Legal Protections: While every situation is unique, legal counsel can help you understand your rights and potential protections. Cooperating with an investigation can be an important step towards both personal and institutional accountability.
• Confidential Consultation: If you are unsure about your own liability or how to proceed, contacting a lawyer who understands both civil and criminal hazing cases can provide clarity and guidance. We prioritize your privacy and will advise you on the best path forward.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Hazing Case

For Cottle County families, the immediacy of a hazing crisis can lead to understandable, yet critical, missteps. Avoiding these common errors is paramount to preserving your child’s legal claims and securing justice.

MISTAKES THAT CAN RUIN YOUR HAZING CASE:

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

   • What parents think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This can look like a cover-up, potentially lead to charges of obstruction of justice, and makes proving your factual case nearly impossible. Critical evidence disappears forever.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even if it’s embarrassing. Digital forensics can sometimes recover deleted messages, but original screenshots are always best.

2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly.

   • What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This almost always causes the organization to immediately lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses on what to say (or not say), and prepare their defenses before you’ve even had a chance to build your case.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in private, then contact Attorney911 before any direct confrontation. Let your legal team manage all communications.

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

   • What universities do: They may pressure families to sign waivers or “internal resolution” agreements to keep incidents quiet and minimize their liability.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue a lawsuit, or accept a settlement that is far below the true value of your child’s injuries and suffering.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or any organization without an experienced attorney reviewing it first.

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

   • What families think: “I want people to know what happened and warn others.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Defense attorneys will screenshot everything you post. Inconsistencies between your posts and later testimony can severely damage credibility. Public posts can also inadvertently waive legal privileges.
   • What to do instead: Document everything privately, then let your lawyer control any public messaging strategically.

5. Letting your child go back to “one last meeting” with the organization.

   • What fraternities say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic; let’s resolve this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This is often a tactic to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements from your child that can be used against them later in a legal proceeding.
   • What to do instead: Once you are even considering legal action, all communication from or to the organization should go through your lawyer.

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

   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating; let us handle this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: While they investigate, critical evidence can disappear, witnesses graduate, the statute of limitations can run out, and the university often controls the narrative to protect its own interests.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW. Consult with Attorney911 immediately. Remember, the university’s internal process is geared towards institutional resolution, not necessarily securing your child’s full legal accountability and compensation.

7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer.

   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim quickly.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Insurance adjusters work for the insurance company, not for you. Recorded statements can be used against you. Early settlement offers are almost always lowball.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to give any statements and tell them, “My attorney will contact you.”

8.5 Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities (UH, Texas A&M, UT) have some sovereign immunity protections, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, Title IX violations, and when suing individuals in their personal capacity. Private universities (SMU, Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on its specific facts—contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It certainly can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default. However, it becomes a state jail felony punishable by time in state jail if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individual officers 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 juries recognize that “consent” given under immense peer pressure, fear of exclusion, and power imbalances is not true voluntary consent. Your child is still a victim under the law.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”
  Generally, the statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death cases in Texas is two years from the date of injury or death. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this period if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known. In cases involving cover-ups or fraud, the statute may be tolled (paused). Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations may destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to protect your rights. Our video, “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?”, provides more details at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  Location does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and whether such off-campus hazing was foreseeable. Many major hazing cases resulting in multi-million-dollar judgments, such as the Pi Delta Psi retreat case (Michael Deng) or the Sigma Pi unofficial house case (Collin Wiant), occurred off-campus.

• “Will this case be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  Most hazing cases settle confidentially before ever reaching a public trial. Our firm prioritizes your family’s privacy and can often work to achieve confidential settlement terms and sealed court records while still pursuing accountability. We understand the desire to protect your child’s reputation while seeking justice.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces the devastating impact of a hazing incident, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need tenacious attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to overcome them. For Cottle County families, and all Texans, The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, brings unparalleled expertise to hazing cases.

From our Houston offices, we serve families throughout Texas, including Cottle County and surrounding areas. We understand that hazing at Texas universities impacts families far beyond campus borders, and we are dedicated to bringing justice to every corner of the state.

Our unique qualifications for hazing cases are rooted in a blend of insider knowledge, complex litigation experience, and a relentless commitment to victim advocacy:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable insight as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She knows precisely how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims. Her experience anticipating their delay tactics, dissecting coverage exclusion arguments, and understanding their settlement strategies is a tremendous asset. We know their playbook because we used to run it. Lupe Peña’s full profile can be found at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.

• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Ralph Manginello, our managing partner, has extensive federal court experience, including being one of the few Texas firms involved in the complex BP Texas City explosion litigation. We are not intimidated by national fraternities, major universities, or their formidable defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won. We know how to fight powerful defendants and deliver results. Learn more about Ralph Manginello at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/.

• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: Our firm has a proven track record in complex wrongful death cases, working with economists to accurately value loss of life and secure significant settlements. We also have extensive experience in catastrophic injury cases, understanding the long-term needs for lifetime care for victims with brain injuries or permanent disabilities. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force accountability. Our wrongful death practice area is detailed at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/.

• Dual Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the prestigious Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) demonstrates our firm’s deep understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual perspective is crucial when advising witnesses and former members who may face both criminal exposure and civil liability related to hazing incidents. Visit https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/ for more information.

• Unmatched Investigative Depth: We investigate hazing cases with the intensity and precision your child’s future deserves. Our network of experts includes medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists. We are adept at obtaining hidden evidence—from deleted group chats and social media data to subpoenaing national fraternity records and uncovering university files through discovery and public records requests. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does. Our video “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs provides valuable tips on evidence collection.

We recognize the immense emotional toll hazing takes on families. Our job is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We approach every case with empathy and a commitment to thorough investigation, not quick settlements or empty promises.

Don’t let the perpetrators, the organization, or the university control the narrative.

If your child or a loved one has experienced hazing at any Texas campus, we want to hear from you. Families in Cottle County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers and accountability.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We’ll listen to what happened without judgment, explain your legal options, and help you decide on the best path forward.

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We will listen to your story without judgment.
• We’ll review any evidence you have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• We’ll explain your legal options: whether a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither, is appropriate given your unique circumstances.
• We’ll discuss realistic timelines and what you can expect during the legal process.
• We’ll answer your questions about costs. We work on a contingency fee basis, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case. Our video “How Do Contingency Fees Work?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc) explains this fully.
• There’s no pressure to hire us on the spot—we want you to take the time to make the right decision for your family.

You can also learn about potential pitfalls in our video, “Client Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Injury Case,” at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm today:

• 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: If you prefer a consultation in Spanish, please contact Lupe Peña directly at lupe@atty911.com. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

Reading this article does not create an attorney–client relationship. Every case is unique, and we cannot guarantee specific outcomes. An experienced attorney can review your specific facts, explain your rights under Texas law, and help you understand your options. Whether you’re in Cottle County or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone. Call us today.

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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