Texas Hazing: A Comprehensive Guide for Crane County Families on Campus Abuse, Law, and Accountability at UT, Texas A&M, UH, SMU, and Baylor

It’s recruitment season, or perhaps deep into pledge education, at one of Texas’s vibrant university campuses. Your child, a bright student from our close-knit Crane County community, is excited to join a new group—a fraternity, a sorority, a club, or an athletic team. They call home less frequently, seem more tired, and are evasive when asked about what they’re doing. “It’s just tradition, Mom and Dad,” they might say, or “Everyone has to do it to get in.” One night, the call comes. It’s not your child. It’s a panicked voice from an unfamiliar number, or worse, someone from the university calling to tell you there’s been an “incident.” Your child is in the emergency room, or worse. They were forced to drink beyond measure, pushed to their physical limits, humiliated, or even assaulted, all in the name of “brotherhood” or “sisterhood.” Someone is hurt, and everyone involved is scared—scared of getting caught, scared of getting help, scared of breaking the code of silence.

This isn’t a hypothetical scenario. This is the devastating reality that too many families from Crane County and across Texas face every year. What starts as an exciting chapter in a young person’s life can quickly devolve into a nightmare of physical harm, psychological trauma, and even death, all under the guise of “initiation.” The pressure to belong, the desire for acceptance, and the fear of reporting can trap students in dangerous situations they never imagined.

This comprehensive guide to hazing and the law in Texas is written for families in Crane County and across our great state who need to understand: what hazing looks like in 2025—far beyond the old stereotypes; how Texas and federal law treat hazing violations; what we can learn from major national cases and how their precedents apply to families here; what has been happening at prominent Texas institutions like the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor University, as well as other Texas schools; and crucially, what legal options victims and families in Crane County and throughout Texas may have.

Even if your child attends school far from Crane County, Texas hazing law and the expertise of an experienced Texas legal team can help. We serve families throughout Texas, including Crane County, ensuring that geographical distance does not stand in the way of justice. While this article provides general information, it is not specific legal advice. The Manginello Law Firm is here to evaluate individual cases based on their specific facts and help your family navigate these complex and emotionally taxing situations.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

In the first 48 hours:

• Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine” or “don’t want to get anyone in trouble.” Prioritize their health above all else.
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages (DMs) immediately.
  • Photograph injuries from multiple angles and at different stages of healing.
  • Save any physical items that may be evidence (clothing, receipts, objects involved in the hazing).
• Write down everything while your memory is fresh: who was involved, what happened, when and where it took place, and any specific commands or threats made.
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity, sorority, or organization directly. This can lead to evidence destruction or witness coaching.
  • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal advice. You may inadvertently waive critical rights.
  • Post details on public social media. This can compromise your child’s case and privacy.
  • Let your child delete messages or “clean up” any evidence. This is crucial for building a strong legal case.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

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

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Crane County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or current campus culture, hazing often conjures images from old movies—a bit of harmless pranking or some light-hearted initiation rituals. However, hazing in 2025 is far more insidious, dangerous, and technologically sophisticated than ever before. It’s often disguised, goes underground, and can involve severe physical and psychological torment, leaving lasting scars or even leading to death. It extends far beyond fraternities, impacting nearly every type of student organization.

Hazing is 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 critical to understand that saying “I agreed to it” does not automatically make it safe or legal when there is peer pressure, a significant power imbalance, or a fear of exclusion.

Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

Hazing, as defined by Texas law and understood in legal practice, encompasses activities that cause physical or mental harm. It’s not just about physical blows; it includes behaviors that compromise a student’s safety, dignity, or well-being for the purpose of initiation or continued affiliation with an organization. These acts carry no legitimate educational purpose and often occur in secret, perpetuating a dangerous cycle.

Main Categories of Hazing

Modern hazing tactics are diverse and often overlapping. They include:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is one of the most common and deadly forms of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking of alcoholic beverages, often to dangerous levels. Examples include chugging challenges, “lineups” where specific quantities of alcohol must be consumed, drinking games designed for rapid intoxication, or being pressured to consume unknown or mixed substances. Fatalities from alcohol poisoning are tragically frequent in hazing incidents.

• Physical Hazing: This category includes any act that causes physical discomfort, pain, or potential injury. This can range from paddling and beatings to extreme calisthenics, forced “workouts,” or “smokings” far beyond normal physical conditioning. Other forms include sleep deprivation, food/water deprivation, or exposure to extreme environmental conditions like frigid temperatures or excessive heat.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These acts are designed to degrade, embarrass, or sexually exploit new members. This can involve forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (like “roasted pig” positions), wearing degrading costumes, or being subjected to acts with racist, sexist, or homophobic overtones, including slurs or forced role-play. Such hazing can lead to severe psychological trauma and, in some cases, can cross the line into sexual assault.

• Psychological Hazing: This type of hazing inflicts mental anguish rather than direct physical harm, although the effects can be just as devastating. Examples include verbal abuse, threats, isolation from family and friends, manipulation, forced confessions, or public shaming on social media or in meetings. This constant mental pressure can lead to anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and other long-term psychological issues.

• Digital/Online Hazing: With the rise of technology, hazing has evolved to include sophisticated digital tactics. This involves group chat dares, “challenges,” and public humiliation orchestrated via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Discord, or private messaging apps. Pledges might be pressured to create or share compromising images or videos, or have their phones monitored and controlled by older members, requiring instant responses at all hours.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception that hazing is limited to “frat boys” or specific types of organizations. The reality is that hazing occurs in a wide variety of student groups across universities, including those where Crane County students might participate.

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes those under Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and various multicultural Greek councils. While many operate responsibly, these groups are often at the center of hazing reports.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: Organizations with a structured hierarchy and emphasis on tradition, such as the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets, can unfortunately become environments for hazing activities disguised as leadership training or “toughness” exercises.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs, and Social Organizations: Groups like the Texas Cowboys at UT Austin, or various spirit and social clubs at any university, have faced allegations of hazing violations where “tradition” is used to justify abusive behavior.
• Athletic Teams: From football to basketball, baseball, cheerleading, and even club sports, athletes are often subjected to hazing rituals. This can include physical abuse, forced alcohol consumption, or humiliating acts designed to “bond” the team. As seen at Northwestern University, hazing can occur even in high-profile, professionalized athletic programs.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups are not immune. Marching band members, theater groups, and other performing arts ensembles have been known to engage in hazing, as tragically demonstrated by the Robert Champion case at Florida A&M University.
• Academic, Service, and Cultural Organizations: Any group that has a hierarchical structure and an initiation process can be susceptible to hazing. The desire for belonging can cause new members to endure discomfort or abuse they would otherwise never tolerate.

The underlying commonalities are social status, tradition, power imbalances, and intense secrecy. These powerful forces keep these dangerous practices alive, even when everyone “knows” hazing is illegal and universally condemned by universities and national organizations alike.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing is crucial for families in Crane County seeking justice and accountability. In Texas, we have clear laws in place, a patchwork of federal regulations, and a robust civil litigation process that can hold individuals and institutions responsible for harm caused by hazing.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has specific anti-hazing provisions outlined in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This framework makes it clear that hazing is not just a university policy violation but a serious legal offense.

Hazing is broadly defined in Texas Education Code § 37.151 as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student, that:

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

In plain English, if someone makes you do something dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they meant to do it or were reckless about the risk, that is hazing under Texas law. This definition is intentionally broad:

• It applies on or off campus, underscoring that physical location does not excuse hazing.
• It covers both mental and physical harm, recognizing the profound psychological damage hazing can inflict.
• The required intent doesn’t have to be malicious; “reckless” is enough—meaning the person knew or should have known the risk and proceeded anyway.
• Crucially, consent is not a defense. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that even if the person being hazed “agreed” to the activity, it is still legally considered hazing if it meets the statutory definition.

The criminal penalties for hazing in Texas are significant:

• Under § 37.152, hazing that doesn’t cause serious injury is generally a Class B Misdemeanor.
• If hazing results in an injury requiring medical attention, it escalates to a Class A Misdemeanor.
• Most severely, if hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it is classified as a State Jail Felony.

Additionally, individuals who fail to report hazing (if they are a member or officer and knew about it) or who retaliate against someone who reports hazing can also face misdemeanor charges.

Beyond individual perpetrators, § 37.153 addresses organizational liability: student organizations themselves can be criminally prosecuted for hazing if they authorized or encouraged the hazing, or if an officer or member acting in an official capacity knew about the hazing and failed to report it. Penalties for organizations can include fines up to $10,000 per violation, and universities can revoke recognition, effectively banning the organization from campus.

The law further encourages reporting through § 37.154, which grants immunity for good-faith reporting. A person who reports a hazing incident to university or law enforcement in good faith is immune from civil or criminal liability that might otherwise result from the report. Moreover, akin to “Good Samaritan” laws, many university policies and Texas law provide amnesty for students who call 911 for medical emergencies, even if underage drinking or hazing was involved, prioritizing health and safety.

Finally, § 37.156 mandates reporting by educational institutions. Texas colleges and universities must provide hazing prevention education, publish clear anti-hazing policies, and maintain and publish annual reports of hazing violations and disciplinary actions. This public record, exemplified by the University of Texas at Austin’s detailed log, allows families to track organizations with prior violations and can serve as crucial background in civil litigation.

While Texas law is robust, it generally falls “in the middle” compared to states like Pennsylvania (Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law), Louisiana (Max Gruver Act), and Ohio (Collin’s Law), which have enacted laws branded with victims’ names and made felony hazing more easily accessible. Nevertheless, the existing Texas framework provides powerful avenues for accountability.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

It’s important for Crane County families to understand the distinction between criminal and civil legal actions related to hazing. These are separate processes with different goals:

• Criminal cases are brought by the state (prosecutors) against individuals or organizations accused of violating criminal hazing statutes or related laws (like assault, furnishing alcohol to minors, or even manslaughter in fatal cases). The primary aim of a criminal case is punishment for illegal acts, which can include jail time, probation, and fines.
• Civil cases are filed by victims or their surviving families against individuals and entities responsible for the hazing. The goal here is monetary compensation for damages suffered and holding parties accountable through financial means. Civil cases typically focus on theories of negligence, gross negligence, wrongful death, negligent supervision, and premises liability.

Crucially, these two legal avenues can run side-by-side. A criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. The standards of proof differ, and findings in one type of case do not automatically dictate the outcome of the other. Our firm can help families navigate both the criminal justice system, where appropriate, and the civil litigation process.

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

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

• The Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024) represents a significant federal effort. This act requires colleges and universities that receive federal funding to be more transparent about hazing incidents. By around 2026, these institutions must publicly report hazing data and strengthen their prevention and education initiatives. This aims to provide families with more information and put pressure on schools to address hazing proactively.
• Title IX applies when hazing involves elements of sexual harassment, sexual assault, or gender-based discrimination. Federal law prohibits sex-based discrimination in education, and universities found to be deliberately indifferent to hazing that falls under Title IX may face severe consequences, including loss of federal funding.
• The Clery Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. Hazing incidents involving assaults, alcohol-related offenses, or other crimes can fall under Clery reporting requirements, further contributing to institutional accountability and informing the public about potential dangers.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Determining who can be held responsible in a civil hazing lawsuit is a complex but critical step. Our investigations target all parties who contributed to the harm, both directly and indirectly:

• Individual Students: Those who actively planned, enforced, carried out, supplied alcohol, or helped cover up hazing acts can be held personally liable. This includes pledge educators, chapter officers, and individual members.
• Local Chapters/Organizations: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself, if it operates as a recognized legal entity, can be sued. The actions of its leadership and members, especially if acting under the organization’s implicit or explicit direction, can lead to chapter liability.
• National Fraternities/Sororities: The national headquarters of Greek letter organizations are often key defendants. They set policies, collect dues, provide risk management training, and can be held liable if they knew or should have known about a local chapter’s hazing history and failed to intervene effectively. Evidence of prior hazing incidents at other chapters can strongly support claims against national organizations.
• Universities or Governing Boards: Colleges and universities themselves can be found liable for hazing if they were negligent in supervising student organizations, failed to enforce their own anti-hazing policies, or had prior knowledge of hazing that they failed to address adequately. While public universities in Texas (like UH, Texas A&M, UT) have some sovereign immunity, exceptions exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, and certain federal claims like Title IX violations. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections.
• Third Parties: Depending on the specific facts, other entities might also share liability. This could include landlords of off-campus houses where hazing took place, bars or alcohol suppliers involved in furnishing alcohol to minors, or event organizers who failed to ensure a safe environment.

Every case is fact-specific; not every party is liable in every situation. Our firm conducts thorough investigations to identify all potentially liable parties and ensure comprehensive accountability.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragedy of hazing is not new, but the patterns of abuse, the institutional failures, and the legal precedents established in major cases provide crucial insights for families in Crane County and across Texas. These national stories illustrate the severe consequences of hazing and help guide our approach to seeking justice here at home.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Forced or coerced alcohol consumption remains the leading cause of hazing-related deaths. These cases demonstrate a chillingly familiar script:

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (February 2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after a “bid acceptance” event involving extreme alcohol consumption. Chapter surveillance cameras captured him suffering multiple falls and injuries, with fraternity brothers delaying calling for help for nearly 12 hours. The aftermath involved dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the passing of Pennsylvania’s landmark Anti-Hazing Law named in his honor. This case highlighted the devastating combination of extreme intoxication, deliberate delay in calling 911, and a pervasive culture of silence.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (November 2017): Andrew Coffey, a pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event where pledges were given handles of hard liquor. Multiple fraternity members were prosecuted, with some pleading guilty to misdemeanor hazing. Florida State University temporarily suspended all Greek life in response and initiated a statewide anti-hazing movement, demonstrating that formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a recurring script for disaster.
• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (September 2017): Max Gruver, a pledge at LSU, died from alcohol toxicity after being forced to participate in a “Bible study” drinking game where incorrect answers meant mandatory drinking. His blood alcohol content was 0.495%. His death led to the enactment of the Max Gruver Act, Louisiana’s felony hazing law, setting a precedent that legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of hazing. The family later secured a $6.1 million verdict against one of the fraternity members.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (March 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” pledge night. Multiple fraternity members were convicted of hazing-related charges. His family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with $7 million coming from the national Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity and approximately $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This case underscored that universities, not just fraternities, can face significant financial and reputational consequences.

These cases, though occurring outside Texas, establish critical precedents concerning foreseability, negligence, and the legal responsibility of national organizations and universities. The legal outcomes here impact how similar incidents might be approached in Texas courts, offering guidance for Crane County families.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Hazing is not always about alcohol. These cases expose the dangers of physical abuse and disturbing rituals:

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (December 2013): Michael Deng, a pledge, died from a traumatic brain injury during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. He was blindfolded, weighted down with a backpack, and repeatedly tackled during a “glass ceiling” ritual. Fraternity members delayed calling 911. Multiple members were convicted, and the national fraternity was found guilty of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, subsequently banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years. This tragedy showed that off-campus “retreats” can be as dangerous or worse than on-campus parties, and that national organizations can face severe criminal and civil sanctions, setting a crucial precedent for organizational liability.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing extends beyond Greek life, infiltrating other prominent student organizations, including athletic programs.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In a widely publicized scandal, former football players alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the university’s Division I football program over multiple years. Multiple lawsuits swiftly followed against Northwestern and coaching staff. Head coach Pat Fitzgerald was fired and later confidentially settled a wrongful-termination suit with the university. This case demonstrated unequivocally that hazing is not limited to Greek life; even high-profile, big-money athletic organizations can harbor systemic abuse, raising critical questions about institutional oversight.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies, while heart-wrenching, reveal critical patterns for families in our Crane County community and throughout Texas:

• Common threads in virtually all severe hazing incidents include forced drinking, physical abuse, humiliating acts, deliberate delays or denials of medical care, and concerted efforts to cover up the truth.
• Meaningful reforms, multi-million-dollar settlements, and significant verdicts often follow only after tragedy strikes and courageous litigation or advocacy begins.
• Families in Crane County whose children attend or plan to attend Texas universities like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor are operating within a legal landscape profoundly shaped by these national lessons. What happened in Ohio or Pennsylvania can and does influence the arguments for liability and justice in Texas courts.

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

For Crane County families, the choice of university is significant. Each major Texas institution has its own culture, policies, and history with student conduct. Our Crane County community, while close-knit, sends students across the state, and many of our families have direct ties to these universities. Consequently, understanding the hazing landscape at these institutions is paramount.

University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus, is a popular choice for many students, including those from Crane County who seek its diverse programs and city environment. Located in Houston, it is a significant institution for families in Harris County and the broader Houston metropolitan area.

5.1.1 Campus & culture snapshot

The University of Houston is a large, diverse urban campus known for its strong academic programs and active campus life. Greek life is a prominent feature, with several fraternities and sororities under various councils (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, multicultural). Beyond Greek organizations, UH also boasts a wide array of student organizations, including cultural groups, sports clubs, and academic societies, all of which fall under the university’s Student Life policies.

5.1.2 Hazing policy & reporting

UH’s anti-hazing policy, consistent with Texas law, strictly prohibits 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 acts causing mental distress as part of initiation or affiliation. UH provides clear reporting channels through the Dean of Students’ office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). While UH provides a hazing statement and generally disciplines organizations, the level of transparency for specific incident details may vary.

5.1.3 Example incident & response

In a notable incident around 2016-2017, members of the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity chapter at UH were involved in serious hazing allegations. Pledges were reportedly deprived of sufficient food, water, and sleep during a multi-day event. One student allegedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being slammed onto a table or similar surface during an initiation activity. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was ultimately suspended by the university. Subsequent disciplinary references at UH have also highlighted various fraternities and organizations engaging in behavior “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” including alcohol misuse and policy violations leading to further suspensions or probations. These incidents underscore UH’s willingness to enforce its anti-hazing policies, but also reveal the ongoing challenge of preventing such behavior.

5.1.4 How a UH hazing case might proceed

Given UH’s location in Houston, hazing incidents may involve both the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) and the Houston Police Department (HPD), depending on where the incident occurred and its severity. Civil lawsuits against individuals and organizations for hazing at UH would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. Potential defendants would include the individual students involved, the local chapter itself, the national fraternity or sorority, and potentially the university and even property owners where the hazing took place. Knowing the local jurisdiction and its law enforcement practices is key for navigating these cases effectively for Crane County families.

5.1.5 What UH students & parents should do

For Crane County families with students attending or considering UH, taking proactive steps is vital:

• Report hazing immediately: Utilize UH’s reporting channels (Dean of Students, UHPD, or confidential tips) if you suspect or witness hazing.
• Document everything: Record dates, times, descriptions of events, and any communication with university officials.
• Understand prior incidents: While UH’s transparency can sometimes be limited compared to other institutions, inquire about prior complaints or disciplinary actions against specific organizations.
• Seek legal counsel promptly: Contacting a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases can help uncover prior disciplinary actions and internal university files through legal discovery, which might not be publicly disclosed. Early legal intervention can make a crucial difference in preserving evidence and understanding your full range of options.
• Prioritize safety: If your child is in immediate danger, call 911 first, then our firm.

Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, particularly its robust Corps of Cadets program, represents a unique confluence of tradition, military culture, and a significant Greek presence. Many families from Crane County and across Texas are deeply connected to the Aggie traditions, making hazing concerns especially sensitive. Texas A&M is a major institution in the Bryan-College Station area and attracts students from all across Texas, including Crane County.

5.2.1 Campus & culture snapshot

Texas A&M is renowned for its deep-seated traditions, strong alumni network, and, of course, the Corps of Cadets, which imbues the university with a distinct military-style culture. This environment, alongside a very active Greek life (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, multicultural), a strong athletic program, and hundreds of student organizations, fosters intense loyalty and often, pressure to conform. The very emphasis on “tradition” and “unity” can sometimes be exploited for hazing activities.

5.2.2 Hazing policy & reporting

Texas A&M has comprehensive anti-hazing policies for all student organizations, including the Corps of Cadets, athletic teams, and fraternities/sororities. These policies strictly prohibit behavior defined as hazing under Texas Education Code. Reporting channels are available through the Student Conduct Office, the Corps of Cadets leadership, Title IX coordinator, and the University Police Department (UPD). A&M actively publicizes information regarding hazing prevention and reporting to its student body.

5.2.3 Example incident & response

Texas A&M has faced significant hazing incidents both within its Greek system and the Corps.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit (around 2021): This particularly egregious incident involved allegations from two pledges who claimed they were covered in a mixture of substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, during a hazing ritual. This caused severe chemical burns that required skin graft surgeries. The pledges sued the fraternity for $1 million, leading to the suspension of the A&M SAE chapter for two years by the university.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging degrading hazing that included 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, drawing significant attention to hazing practices within the Corps. While A&M stated it addressed the matter via its internal disciplinary procedures, the lawsuit highlighted that hazing issues persist even in highly structured environments with clear rules.

These incidents underscore that hazing at Texas A&M is not confined to one type of organization and can result in severe physical and psychological trauma.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M hazing case might proceed

Hazing cases originating from Texas A&M would involve the University Police Department (UPD) for criminal investigations and may fall under the jurisdiction of Brazos County courts for civil matters, as College Station is located in Brazos County. Due to the university’s large endowment and the national scope of many fraternities, potential defendants could include individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, the university, and potentially specific Corps leadership if the hazing occurred within that structure. For Crane County families, understanding the jurisdiction and the specific A&M policies is vital.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M students & parents should do

Families in Crane County with ties to Texas A&M should be keenly aware:

• Educate yourselves: Understand the specific nuances of hazing within A&M’s Greek life and the Corps of Cadets – what’s presented as “tough” or “tradition” might be illegal hazing.
• Report concerns: Utilize A&M’s anonymous reporting systems, Student Conduct office, or UPD if you suspect hazing.
• Document Corps activities: If your child is in the Corps, keep records of any questionable directives, physical demands, or late-night activities that interfere with sleep or academics.
• Monitor for signs: Be vigilant for the warning signs of hazing, which can be particularly insidious in environments that emphasize loyalty and secrecy.
• Consult legal experts: When facing hazing from organizations as powerful and traditional as those at Texas A&M, consulting an experienced hazing attorney early is critical for preserving evidence and understanding how to hold both individuals and the institution accountable.

University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin holds a prominent position in the minds of many Crane County students dreaming of a top-tier education. Its vibrant campus culture and large Greek system mean that hazing, unfortunately, is a recurring concern. As a major institution in Travis County, UT’s actions and policies are closely watched across the state.

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, rich traditions, and a dynamic social scene. Its Greek life is one of the largest and most influential in the nation, encompassing a wide range of fraternities and sororities. Beyond Greek life, UT has numerous spirit organizations, athletic teams, and clubs that contribute to a high-pressure environment where hazing can unfortunately take root, often under the guise of “building character” or “Longhorn pride.”

5.3.2 Hazing policy & reporting

UT Austin maintains a robust anti-hazing policy that strictly prohibits hazing by any student organization or individual, whether on or off campus, as per Texas law. The university is notably transparent, publishing a comprehensive Hazing Violations webpage (hazing.utexas.edu) that lists organizations found responsible for hazing, the specific conduct, and the disciplinary sanctions imposed. This public reporting is a critical tool for accountability. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students, the Office of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity, and the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD).

5.3.3 Example incident & response

UT’s public Hazing Violations webpage reveals a consistent pattern of incidents affecting a diverse range of organizations.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): The Pi Kappa Alpha chapter at UT was found responsible for hazing after new members were directed to consume excessive amounts of milk and perform strenuous calisthenics beyond safe limits. This behavior was determined to constitute hazing, and the chapter was placed on probation with requirements to implement new hazing-prevention education.
• Texas Wranglers (Spirit Organization): This spirit organization has also faced disciplinary action for hazing, including forced workouts and alcohol-related misconduct during initiation processes.
• Other groups, including fraternities and various spirit and social organizations, have been sanctioned for forced consumption, sleep deprivation, physical punishment, and other harmful practices, all documented on UT’s public log.

This consistent and public documentation highlights UT’s commitment to transparency, but also reveals the persistent challenge of hazing culture, even with active university oversight.

5.3.4 How a UT hazing case might proceed

Hazing incidents at UT Austin could involve criminal investigations by both the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) and the Austin Police Department (APD), depending on the nature and location of the offense. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in Travis County courts. Given UT’s status as a public university, some sovereign immunity protections might apply, but exceptions exist, especially for gross negligence or Title IX violations. The public nature of UT’s hazing violation log is a significant advantage for potential plaintiffs, as it can directly demonstrate a pattern of misconduct and the university’s knowledge of prior issues. This assists families from Crane County in building a strong civil case.

5.3.5 What UT students & parents should do

For Crane County families with students at UT Austin:

• Review the Hazing Violations page: Regularly check UT’s public hazing reports (hazing.utexas.edu) to stay informed about organizations with past violations.
• Understand the “traditions”: Many UT organizations have strong traditions; critically evaluate whether these traditions cross into hazing.
• Utilize reporting channels: Use the Dean of Students office, UTPD, or the anonymous reporting forms available on campus.
• Preserve evidence: Given the tech-savviness of UT students, remember that digital evidence (chats, photos, videos) is crucial.
• Seek legal guidance: An experienced hazing attorney can leverage UT’s stringent reporting requirements and potentially public records to build a case, which is especially important when navigating claims against a public university with immunity protections.

Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, known for its beautiful campus and strong academic and social programs, particularly its robust Greek life, is a destination for many students. While a private institution, it is equally committed to anti-hazing efforts, and families from Crane County considering SMU should be aware of the university’s particular context. Located in Dallas, SMU is a key campus for North Texas and beyond.

5.4.1 Campus & culture snapshot

SMU boasts a vibrant campus culture with significant emphasis on Greek life, which plays a central role in the social experience for many students. Its student organizations, social clubs, and athletic programs foster a strong sense of community and often competitive recruitment. The culture, while aspirational, can sometimes contribute to environments where hazing, particularly subtle or psychological forms, are perpetuated among new members eager to gain acceptance.

5.4.2 Hazing policy & reporting

SMU holds a firm stance against hazing, outlining comprehensive policies that explicitly prohibit acts designed to demean, injure, or coerce new members, regardless of their location on or off campus. SMU encourages reporting through its Office of Student Conduct & Community Standards, Title IX Coordinator, and the SMU Police Department. Like other universities, SMU invests in prevention programs and emphasizes education to foster a safe campus environment. While detailed public logs of all hazing incidents may not be as accessible as at public institutions, SMU does investigate and take disciplinary action.

5.4.3 Example incident & response

SMU has faced its share of hazing incidents, demonstrating that such issues are not unique to public universities.

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): This fraternity chapter was implicated in serious hazing allegations. New members reportedly endured paddling, forced excessive alcohol consumption, and sleep deprivation as part of their initiation program. Following a university investigation, the Kappa Alpha Order chapter was suspended. The suspension imposed significant restrictions, including a ban on recruiting new members for several years, until around 2021. This incident highlights SMU’s resolve to address hazing through disciplinary action.

These types of incidents demonstrate the ongoing challenges within Greek life, even at institutions with strong anti-hazing policies.

5.4.4 How a SMU hazing case might proceed

As a private university, SMU generally has fewer sovereign immunity protections compared to public institutions. This can sometimes streamline the process of pursuing civil lawsuits against the university itself, in addition to individuals and national organizations. Hazing cases at SMU would typically be heard in Dallas County courts. Law enforcement involvement could include the SMU Police Department and the Dallas Police Department. The ability of an experienced attorney to compel discovery to access internal SMU reports and disciplinary records, even when not publicly posted, is a significant advantage for families from Crane County seeking accountability.

5.4.5 What SMU students & parents should do

For Crane County families with students at SMU:

• Understand private vs. public institution nuances: While SMU has robust policies, the transparency of disciplinary actions can differ from public universities. Legal counsel can help navigate this.
• Utilize SMU’s reporting mechanisms: Familiarize yourself with the Office of Student Conduct and other campus resources for reporting hazing.
• Guard your privacy: Given the social aspects often tied to private university life, be mindful of digital communications and social media, which can be critical evidence.
• Do not delay consultation: If hazing is suspected, obtaining legal advice early is crucial. An attorney can help preserve evidence and develop a strategy tailored to a private university’s specific legal and procedural landscape.

Baylor University

Baylor University, a top-tier private Christian university, attracts students from across Texas, including Crane County, seeking a values-based education. Its unique identity and prior institutional challenges with oversight mean that hazing issues are examined through a particular lens. Located in Waco, in McLennan County, Baylor’s campus directly serves families in the Central Texas region.

5.3.1 Campus & culture snapshot

Baylor University proudly promotes a faith-based educational environment, attracting students who value its strong academic programs and Christian mission. The campus culture emphasizes community and strong traditions, which for some organizations, can, unfortunately, create opportunities for hazing. Baylor hosts a range of student organizations, including fraternities, sororities, athletic teams, and service groups. The university’s history of scrutiny over issues like sexual assault and Title IX compliance (from the football scandal several years ago) has led to heightened awareness regarding institutional oversight and student safety.

5.3.2 Hazing policy & reporting

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing in any form, aligning its policies with Texas state law. Its Code of Conduct explicitly outlines zero tolerance for hazing activities that endanger students’ physical or mental health. Baylor provides clear channels for reporting through its Department of Student Conduct, Title IX Office, and Baylor Police Department. The university emphasizes the importance of a safe campus environment and provides education on hazing prevention, often linking it to broader ethical and Christian principles.

5.3.3 Example incident & response

Baylor, like other institutions, has seen instances of hazing.

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): A significant incident involved the Baylor baseball team, where an investigation into hazing allegations led to the suspension of 14 players. The suspensions were strategically staggered over the early part of the baseball season to address the misconduct. This incident demonstrated that hazing is not confined to Greek life and can occur within major athletic programs even at institutions with a strong ethical code.

These incidents highlight the ongoing challenge of enforcing anti-hazing policies across all student organizations, even at universities with strong institutional values and prior experience with heightened scrutiny over student safety.

5.3.4 How a Baylor hazing case might proceed

As a private institution, Baylor University generally does not benefit from sovereign immunity as public universities do, which can be advantageous for civil plaintiffs. Hazing cases arising from Baylor would typically be heard in McLennan County courts, the seat of Waco. Law enforcement involvement could include the Baylor Police Department and the Waco Police Department. Given Baylor’s prior experiences with institutional oversight issues, civil cases might more easily establish claims regarding inadequate supervision or enforcement of policies, particularly if a pattern of prior incidents can be demonstrated. This provides a direct avenue for families from Crane County to pursue accountability.

5.3.5 What Baylor students & parents should do

For Crane County families with students at Baylor:

• Scrutinize “traditions”: Be critical of any “tradition” that involves secrecy, discomfort, or coercion, as this may be hazing.
• Understand Baylor’s specific context: Baylor’s unique religious branding and its prior experiences with institutional oversight mean that hazing allegations may be handled with particular scrutiny, but also require diligent pursuit to ensure full accountability.
• Utilize all reporting avenues: Report any hazing concerns to Baylor’s Department of Student Conduct, the Title IX Office (if applicable), or Baylor PD.
• Document and involve legal counsel: Any suspicion of hazing warrants immediate documentation of all relevant details. Engaging an experienced hazing attorney can help navigate potential complexities, especially when dealing with a private institution that may have a strong legal defense team.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

When hazing occurs, particularly within Greek life, the local chapter is rarely an isolated entity. It is almost always part of a larger, national organization. For Crane County families, understanding the connection between local chapters at Texas universities and their national counterparts is crucial because national hazing histories often reveal patterns of behavior that can strengthen a legal case. The national organizations frequently have thick anti-hazing manuals and risk policies precisely because they have seen deaths and catastrophic injuries in the past. This knowledge of prior incidents creates a legal concept known as foreseeability, which is powerful in negligence arguments.

Why National Histories Matter

The reality is that many fraternities and sororities present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor—such as Pi Kappa Alpha, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, and Kappa Alpha Order—are part of large national organizations. These national headquarters often:

• Develop extensive anti-hazing policies and risk management guidelines.
• Require local chapters to adhere to these policies and provide training.
• Send advisors and representatives to oversee local chapters.
• Collect dues and maintain a chartered relationship with local chapters.

Because of this oversight and past experience, national HQs are usually well aware of common hazing patterns: forced drinking nights, “Big/Little” reveal events escalating into dangerous consumption, violent physical “traditions,” and humiliating rituals. When a Texas chapter repeats a script that led to injury, suspension, or death at another chapter in a different state, it demonstrates that the national organization had prior notice of the risk. This knowledge can be a critical factor in a lawsuit, helping to establish negligence or even gross negligence against the national entity, regardless of their claims of “it was a rogue chapter” or “we didn’t know.”

Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

While an exhaustive list is beyond this guide, we can identify some major organizations present at Texas universities and link them to well-known national hazing incidents:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): This fraternity has chapters at UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin. Nationally, Pi Kappa Alpha has a deeply troubling history with hazing, particularly involving forced alcohol consumption. The tragic death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University in 2021, who died from alcohol poisoning after a “Big/Little” pledge event, led to a $10 million settlement against the national organization and the university. Another incident involving David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University in 2012 also centered on alcohol poisoning during a pledge event and resulted in a $14 million settlement. These patterns demonstrate a foreseeable risk associated with this organization’s “traditions.”

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): SAE has chapters at UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin, and has been unfortunately linked to multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries nationwide involving alcohol. In a 2021 incident at Texas A&M University, two pledges alleged they suffered severe chemical burns from substances poured on them during hazing, leading to skin grafts and a $1 million lawsuit against the chapter. At the University of Texas at Austin in January 2024, an exchange student alleged assault by SAE members that resulted in severe injuries. Nationally, SAE was implicated in a traumatic brain injury case filed in 2023 at the University of Alabama. SAE’s repeated involvement in serious hazing incidents across the country underscores significant organizational challenges.

• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU, this fraternity is forever associated with the death of Maxwell “Max” Gruver at Louisiana State University in 2017. Gruver died from alcohol toxicity after a forced drinking game. The subsequent Max Gruver Act in Louisiana and a $6.1 million verdict against one of the members highlight the severe consequences of their hazing practices. The national organization had a clear pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing.

• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): This fraternity, present at UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin, was responsible for the death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University in 2017 from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night.” The incident prompted serious criminal charges and a temporary suspension of all Greek life at FSU.

• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU, Beta Theta Pi gained national notoriety due to the shocking death of Timothy Piazza at Penn State in 2017. Piazza died from traumatic brain injuries after a forced drinking event where fraternity brothers delayed calling for help. The extensive criminal and civil actions that followed created national headlines and led to powerful new anti-hazing legislation.

• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Chapters exist at UH, Texas A&M, and Baylor. This organization was involved in the death of Chad Meredith at the University of Miami in 2001, who drowned after being encouraged by fraternity members to swim while intoxicated. This case led to a $12.6 million jury verdict for the Meredith family and a hazing law named in his honor in Florida. More recently, allegations of hazing at Texas A&M University in 2023 have involved serious injuries, including rhabdomyolysis from extreme physical hazing.

• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI): Present at Texas A&M, this fraternity was responsible for the catastrophic injury to Danny Santulli at the University of Missouri in 2021. Santulli suffered severe, permanent brain damage after being forced to consume excessive alcohol, requiring 24/7 care. Lawsuits against 22 defendants, including the fraternity, resulted in multi-million-dollar settlements.

These examples are not exhaustive but illustrate a disturbing pattern: when a local chapter at a Texas university engages in hazing that mirrors past incidents elsewhere, the national organization’s argument of “we didn’t know” or “it was only local” becomes increasingly difficult to sustain.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

This cross-state pattern evidence is crucial for our legal strategy in hazing cases impacting Crane County families. It explains how:

• Patterns across states and campuses demonstrate that certain organizations have received repeated warnings about specific dangerous hazing practices. This establishes foreseeability, meaning the national organization knew or should have known these incidents were likely to occur again.
• Courts can then consider whether national organizations:
  • Meaningfully enforced their anti-hazing policies, or if policies were merely “paper policies.”
  • Responded to prior incidents aggressively and effectively enough to truly deter future hazing.
• This evidence significantly affects:
  • Settlement leverage: It can compel national organizations and their insurers to engage in serious negotiations rather than protracted defense.
  • Insurance coverage disputes: Experienced hazing attorneys use this evidence to challenge insurer claims that hazing was “unforeseeable” or an “intentional act” not covered by policies.
  • Potential for punitive damages: In cases of extreme recklessness or deliberate indifference, demonstrating a pattern of ignoring warnings can strengthen arguments for punitive damages, which are designed to punish egregious conduct and deter future harm.

When an organization’s national history is replete with similar incidents, it becomes exponentially harder for them to claim ignorance or lack of control over their local chapters, making a case stronger for victims and families.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

For families in Crane County affected by hazing, building a strong legal case requires meticulous attention to detail, comprehensive investigation, and a deep understanding of today’s legal and technological landscape. Our approach focuses on gathering powerful evidence, accurately assessing damages, and implementing a strategic plan to hold all liable parties accountable.

Evidence

In hazing cases, evidence is absolutely critical and often disappears quickly. We instruct our clients to immediately begin collecting and preserving every piece of information. The types of evidence we typically pursue include:

• Digital Communications: This is often the most potent evidence in modern hazing cases. We meticulously collect and analyze communications from platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, SMS group texts, Discord, Slack, and even fraternity/sorority-specific apps. These messages can reveal the planning, intent, directives, and cover-up attempts related to hazing. Attorney911’s video on using your phone to document evidence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) explains best practices for preserving screenshots and photos. This includes live messages, direct messages, and, in some cases, digitally recovering deleted messages through forensic experts.
• Photos & Videos: Content filmed by members during events (even if deleted), footage shared in group chats or posted on social media, and security camera or doorbell footage from houses and venues are invaluable. This evidence can directly prove the hazing acts, show who was present, and highlight efforts to conceal the activity.
• Internal Organization Documents: These include pledge manuals, initiation scripts, ritual “traditions” lists, and internal communications (emails, texts) from officers about activities or instructions for new members. National policies and training materials are also crucial for establishing the organization’s knowledge and oversight (or lack thereof).
• University Records: We seek prior conduct files, probation/suspensions for the organization, letters of warning about hazing, incident reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices, and Clery Act reports. These records can demonstrate a pattern of misconduct and the university’s awareness of potential risks.
• Medical and Psychological Records: Comprehensive documentation of injuries and psychological trauma is essential. This includes emergency room and hospitalization records, surgery and rehabilitation notes, toxicology reports, and psychological evaluations (for PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidal ideation). These records quantify the physical and mental harm suffered by the victim.
• Witness Testimony: Other pledges, current or former members, roommates, Resident Advisors (RAs), coaches, trainers, and any bystanders can provide critical eyewitness accounts. Their testimony can corroborate claims, fill gaps in evidence, and speak to the culture of the organization.

For Crane County families, evidence collection starts immediately after an incident. We guide clients through securing information before it is lost or destroyed by others.

Damages

In a civil hazing lawsuit, the goal is to secure monetary compensation, or “damages,” for the harm suffered. These damages fall into several categories:

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This covers all costs associated with immediate medical attention (ER, ICU), surgeries, ongoing treatment, physical therapy, medications, and any long-term care plans, particularly for catastrophic injuries like brain damage or organ failure.
• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: This includes lost income if the victim or a parent had to miss work due to the hazing. It also encompasses academic setbacks, missed semesters, lost scholarships, delayed graduation, and a reduced earning capacity if the injuries result in permanent disabilities that affect future career prospects.
• Non-Economic Damages: These compensate for more subjective but deeply impactful harms, such as physical pain and suffering, emotional distress (humiliation, trauma, anxiety, depression), and the loss of enjoyment of life (inability to participate in activities, social withdrawal).
• Wrongful Death Damages (for families): In cases where hazing results in death, the surviving family members (parents, children, spouse) can recover for funeral and burial costs, loss of financial support the deceased would have provided, and the profound emotional suffering, loss of companionship, love, and guidance.
• Punitive Damages: In specific situations where the defendants’ conduct was extremely reckless, willful, or malicious, courts may award punitive damages. These are not meant to compensate the victim but to punish the wrongdoer and deter similar conduct in the future. In Texas, punitive damages are available but often capped.

We meticulously assess all potential damages, working with economists and other experts to ensure a comprehensive valuation of your family’s losses.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

National fraternities, universities, and other organizations often carry substantial insurance policies designed to cover legal liabilities. However, their insurers frequently attempt to deny coverage based on policy exclusions such as “intentional acts” or “criminal conduct.”

This is where the experience of a firm like ours, with attorneys like Lupe Peña who has a background in insurance defense, becomes invaluable. We understand their tactics. We identify all potential sources of insurance coverage, including general liability policies, D&O (Directors and Officers) policies, and even homeowners’ policies of individual members. We then aggressively challenge attempts by insurers to deny their duty to defend or indemnify, using legal arguments that differentiate between the intentional act of hazing and the negligent supervision that allowed it to occur. This complex navigation of insurance law is a critical strategic component in securing compensation for Crane County families.

Practical Guides & FAQs

Knowing what to do and what to avoid is crucial for Crane County families navigating a hazing incident. Here, we offer practical advice for parents, students, and even former members or witnesses.

For Parents

As a parent, your child’s well-being is paramount. Being informed and prepared can make a critical difference.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be observant for a combination of these indicators:

  • Unexplained injuries (bruises, burns, cuts) or repeated “accidents” with weak explanations.
  • Sudden, extreme exhaustion or chronic sleep deprivation.
  • Drastic changes in mood, increased anxiety, depression, or withdrawal from family and old friends.
  • Constant secret phone use for group chats, often with a fear of missing “mandatory” events.
  • Academic decline: grades dropping, skipping classes, or inability to focus.
  • Financial strain: unexplained needs for money, or debt accrued for “chapter” expenses.
  • Secrecy: refusal to talk about group activities, saying “I can’t talk about it,” or fear of “getting in trouble.”
  • Changes in appearance: unkempt, forced distinctive haircuts or clothing choices.

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

  • Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with [organization]?” or “Is there anything making you uncomfortable?”
  • Emphasize their safety and well-being over group status or loyalty. Assure them you will support them regardless of their choices.
  • Let them know that nothing they could say would make you angry or disappointed, only worried about their safety.

• If Your Child Is Hurt:

  • Get them immediate medical care. Prioritize their physical and mental health.
  • Document everything: Take clear photos of injuries from multiple angles and over several days. Screenshot all relevant texts, DMs, social media posts, and group chats they can access. Write down a detailed account of what happened, when, where, and who was involved while memories are fresh.
  • Save everything: Preserve physical evidence like damaged clothing or receipts for forced purchases.

• Dealing with the University:

  • Document every communication with administrators (emails, notes from phone calls). Understand that the university’s primary goal is often to protect its reputation and manage liability.
  • Ask specifically about any prior incidents involving the same organization and what the school did (or didn’t do) in response.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing or hiding what happened, it’s time to consult with an experienced hazing attorney. Early intervention can preserve critical evidence and protect your child’s rights.

For Students / Pledges

If you are a student from Crane County involved in an organization and are questioning what you’re experiencing, know that you have rights and options.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? If you feel unsafe, humiliated, coerced, forced to drink or endure pain, or if the activity is hidden from the public or administrators – it probably is hazing. Any activity required for initiation or membership that causes or could cause physical or mental harm is hazing, regardless of what it’s called.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: The desire to belong and the fear of social exclusion are powerful. Organizations often rely on this “consent” defense. However, Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts and universities recognize that “consent” under significant peer pressure, power imbalance, or fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent. You are not to blame for being hazed.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the right to leave a situation that makes you uncomfortable or unsafe at any time. If you need to exit a dangerous situation, find a safe place (your dorm, a friend’s place, a public area) and call for help (911 for emergencies, or a trusted family member/friend). Send an email or text to the chapter president or new member educator stating you are resigning your pledge/membership immediately. Do not agree to “one last meeting” if you fear pressure or intimidation.
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Many schools and Texas law encourage students to call for help in emergencies by offering protections. You will not get in trouble for calling 911 for a medical emergency, even if underage drinking or hazing is involved. This immunity is designed to save lives, so always prioritize your safety and the safety of others.

For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were once involved in hazing, either as a participant or a witness, and now regret it or wish to speak out, understand that your testimony can prevent future harm and save lives.

• Acknowledge that feeling guilt, fear, or a desire for redemption is a normal response.
• Explain that your testimony and evidence may be crucial to preventing future tragedies and holding responsible parties accountable.
• You may want to seek your own legal advice, but cooperating can be an important step toward justice.
• Attorneys can help you navigate your role as a witness or even a co-defendant, protecting your rights while working towards accountability.

Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For Crane County families, avoiding common pitfalls can safeguard your child’s legal options. These mistakes often stem from good intentions but can severely compromise a hazing case:

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” or “I want to protect their reputation.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This looks like a cover-up to investigators and courts and can even be seen as obstruction of justice. It makes proving your case nearly impossible. Digital forensics can sometimes recover deleted data, but original, timestamped screenshots are invaluable.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing or seemingly minor content. Take screenshots of all group chats, texts, and social media DMs without delay.

2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly:

   • What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
   • Why it’s wrong: The organization will immediately “lawyer up,” destroy evidence, coach witnesses on what to say (or not say), and prepare their defense. You will be at a severe disadvantage.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in secret first. Then, contact an experienced hazing lawyer before any direct confrontation. Let your legal counsel manage all communications with the organization.

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

   • What universities do: They often pressure families to sign waivers, “internal resolution” agreements, or accept minor disciplinary actions as a final resolution.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your child’s right to pursue a civil lawsuit, and any early settlements are often far below the true value of the case and long-term damages.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or any student organization without an experienced hazing 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 to my child and warn others.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Anything posted on public social media can and will be scrutinized and used against your child. Defense attorneys screenshot everything. Inconsistencies or emotional posts can hurt credibility. Public disclosure can also waive certain legal privileges or complicate settlement discussions.
   • What to do instead: Document everything privately. Let your lawyer control public statements or decide on strategic public messaging.

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

   • What fraternities/sororities say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic” or “Let’s resolve this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This is an attempt to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that could hurt your child’s legal case later. It’s designed to control the narrative.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication from your child to the organization (and vice versa) 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, we have strict policies.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Evidence rapidly disappears (deleted messages, changed stories, graduates moving away). The statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit continues to run. Universities often prioritize their own reputation and legal protection, and their internal processes may not lead to real accountability or fair compensation for your child.
   • What to do instead: While the university investigates, you must simultaneously preserve evidence and consult a lawyer immediately. The university’s internal process does not always equate to legal accountability or fair compensation.

7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer:

   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim quickly” or “We need to understand what happened.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Insurance adjusters work for the insurance company, not for you. Their goal is to minimize payouts. Any recorded statement can be used against you, and early settlement offers are almost always lowball.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and refer them to your attorney. Never provide a statement or sign anything without legal counsel.

Short FAQ

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

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It can be. While hazing is typically a Class B misdemeanor, it becomes a state jail felony under Texas law if it causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who are officers or members and fail to report hazing can also face misdemeanor charges.

• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
  Yes. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing charges or a civil claim. Courts recognize that “consent” given under peer pressure, power imbalance, and fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent. Your child is a victim, not responsible for the hazing they endured.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  Generally, there is a 2-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death in Texas. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this period if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known, and the statute may be tolled (paused) in cases of cover-ups or fraud. Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to protect your rights.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The physical location does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities can still be liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and the foreseeability of hazing occurring. Many major hazing cases that resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments (like the Pi Delta Psi retreat case or the Sigma Pi unofficial house death) occurred off-campus.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  Most hazing cases settle confidentially before ever going to trial. We work with our clients to protect their privacy through sealed court records and confidential settlement terms. Our priority is to pursue accountability while respecting your family’s wishes regarding publicity.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing case, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—how campus officials, national organizations, and their high-priced legal teams operate—and how to win anyway. This is where The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, stands apart.

We are a Houston-based Texas personal injury firm with deep experience in serious injury, wrongful death, and institutional accountability cases. From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Crane County and surrounding regions. We understand that hazing at Texas universities impacts families in Crane County and across the state, and we are dedicated to providing the specialized legal representation they need. Many of our clients are linked to major institutions such as the University of Houston, where our office is locally situated, and others throughout Texas like UT Austin, Texas A&M, SMU, and Baylor.

Our firm brings unique qualifications to hazing litigation:

• The Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), has a invaluable background as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She knows their tactics inside and out—exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims, their delay tactics, their coverage exclusion arguments, and their settlement strategies. We know their playbook because we used to help run it.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Ralph Manginello (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/), our managing partner, is one of the few Texas attorneys with direct experience in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, a monumentally complex case against a corporate giant. This federal court experience means we are not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their well-funded defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won. We know how to fight powerful defendants and secure substantial accountability.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We don’t settle cheap. We have a proven track record in complex wrongful death cases, collaborating with economists to accurately value the devastating loss of a life. Our experience extends to catastrophic injury cases, where we work to secure funds for lifetime care plans for victims with brain injuries or permanent disabilities. We build cases that force accountability and ensure maximum compensation. Our wrongful death page details our experience at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/.
• Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) gives our firm a robust understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual perspective is crucial for advising witnesses and former members who may face dual exposure. When hazing results in criminal charges for student members, our criminal defense experience (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/) is a significant asset in advising affected parties.
• Investigative Depth: We utilize a strong network of experts, including medical and digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists. We have a proven ability to obtain hidden evidence, from deleted group chats and social media content to internal chapter records and university files, often through legal discovery and public records requests. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does. Attorney911’s video on using your phone to document evidence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) provides practical advice for our clients.

We understand how fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments actually work behind closed doors. Knowing what makes hazing cases different—the powerful institutional defendants, the insurance coverage fights, and the need to balance victim privacy with public accountability—allows us to build formidable cases. We know this is one of the hardest things a family can face. Our job is to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We are not about bravado or quick settlements; we are about thorough investigation and real accountability. Watch our video explaining contingency fees at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc to learn how we work on a “no win, no fee” basis.

If your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus, we want to hear from you. Families in Crane 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, explain your legal options, and help you decide on the best path forward.

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We’ll listen to your story without judgment.
• We’ll review any evidence you have (photos, texts, medical records).
• We’ll explain your legal options: a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• We’ll discuss realistic timelines and what to expect from 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).
• There’s no pressure to hire us on the spot—take the time you need to decide.
• Everything you tell us is strictly confidential.

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

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

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

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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