Texas Hazing Laws: What Glasscock County Families Need to Know

For families across Texas, including those right here in Glasscock County, the idea of sending a child off to college is often met with a mix of excitement and apprehension. We envision academic growth, new friendships, and valuable life experiences. What we don’t expect, and what no family should ever have to endure, is the devastating reality of hazing.

Imagine this scenario: It’s “initiation night” at an off-campus fraternity house near one of Texas’s major universities. A student from Glasscock County, who traveled hundreds of miles for their education, is surrounded by older members, chanting and filming on their phones. They are being pressured to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol as part of a “tradition” to earn their place. Someone falls, vomits, or collapses. Fear quickly spreads: fear of getting the chapter shut down, fear of “getting in trouble,” fear of losing the friendships they worked so hard to build. And in that crucial moment, instead of calling 911, the group hesitates, debating, covering up, potentially costing someone their life.

This isn’t a rare or isolated incident; it’s a repeating script played out on campuses across the country, including those here in Texas. It’s a risk that families from Big Spring to Garden City, and throughout Glasscock County, face when their children pursue higher education.

This comprehensive guide to hazing and the law in Texas is written for families in Glasscock County and across our great state. We understand that whether your child attends Texas Tech, the University of North Texas, or the larger institutions like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor, the threat of hazing is real. Here, we’ll explain:

• What hazing really looks like in 2025, moving beyond old stereotypes.
• How Texas and federal law treat hazing, and who can be held accountable.
• What we can learn from major national cases and how their lessons apply to Texas families.
• Key insights into what has been happening at the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, as well as other Texas schools.
• The legal options available to victims and families in Glasscock County and throughout Texas when hazing occurs.

We recognize that this information can be difficult to confront. Please understand that this article provides general information and is not specific legal advice. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, is here to evaluate individual cases based on their specific facts and provide the compassionate yet aggressive legal representation your family deserves. We serve families throughout Texas, including our neighbors in Glasscock County.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

• If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

• In the first 48 hours:

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

• Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

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

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Glasscock County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or collegiate organizations, the word “hazing” might conjure images from movies – outdated, perhaps relatively harmless pranks. The reality in 2025 is far more sinister and dangerous. Hazing today is rarely about friendly trickery; it’s about control, coercion, and often, severe physical and psychological abuse.

In plain English, 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. This definition is crucial in Texas because, as we will explain, if your child says, “I agreed to it,” that does not automatically make it safe or legal when there is peer pressure and a power imbalance. True consent cannot exist in an environment of duress or coercion.

Modern hazing methods are varied and often designed to evade detection while inflicting maximum harm. They can escalate from subtle psychological manipulation to life-threatening physical abuse.

Main Categories of Hazing

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing
  This is, tragically, the most common and deadly form of hazing. It involves forcing or coercing new members to consume excessive amounts of alcohol or other substances. Examples include:

  • “Lineups” or “drink-offs” where pledges are made to chug various alcoholic beverages.
  • “Big/Little reveal” nights that devolve into extreme alcohol consumption, often involving entire bottles or “handles” of liquor.
  • Games or trivia where incorrect answers result in forced drinking.
  • Being pressured to consume unknown, mixed, or illicit substances.

• Physical Hazing
  This category involves direct physical harm or extreme physical endurance challenges. It’s often disguised as “team building” or “conditioning.” Examples include:

  • Paddling, beatings, slaps, or punches, sometimes with objects.
  • “Smokings,” “workouts,” or calisthenics (like hundreds of push-ups or prolonged wall sits) far beyond normal physical limits, often continuing until collapse or injury.
  • Sleep deprivation, enforced through late-night “meetings” or early-morning calls that interfere with academic and personal health.
  • Food or water deprivation, or forced consumption of unpalatable, spoiled, or excessive amounts of food.
  • Exposure to extreme cold, heat, or dangerous environments, including being left blindfolded in remote areas.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing
  This type of hazing strips individuals of their dignity and can have lasting psychological consequences. Examples include:

  • Forced nudity or partial nudity, sometimes in public or semi-public settings.
  • Simulated sexual acts, often crude and demeaning (e.g., “elephant walk,” “roasted pig” positions).
  • Forcing pledges to wear degrading costumes or perform embarrassing acts in public.
  • Acts with racist, homophobic, or sexist overtones, including the use of slurs or forced role-playing of stereotypes.

• Psychological Hazing
  While often harder to prove, psychological hazing can be just as damaging as physical abuse. It preys on a new member’s desire to belong and fear of rejection. Examples include:

  • Verbal abuse, constant yelling, insults, threats, and degrading language.
  • Isolation from friends, family, or non-group activities.
  • Manipulation, intimidation, or forced “confessions” of personal information.
  • “Grilling sessions” where new members are verbally torn down by older members.
  • Using public shaming, often on social media or in meetings, to exert control.

• Digital/Online Hazing
  The rise of technology has unfortunately provided new avenues for hazing. This can often happen almost invisibly to parents in Glasscock County, who may not be monitoring every group chat. Examples include:

  • Constant demands in group chats (GroupMe, WhatsApp, Discord) requiring immediate responses, interfering with sleep and academics.
  • Forced participation in online “challenges” or dares via Instagram, Snapchat, or TikTok, often involving embarrassing or harmful acts.
  • Geo-tracking or location sharing demands.
  • Pressure to create or share compromising images or videos.
  • Digital harassment or cyberstalking if new members don’t comply.
  • The creation and sharing of memes or other digital content that mock or degrade specific pledges.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s vital to dispel the myth that hazing is limited to “frat boys.” While fraternities and sororities (across different councils like IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, and multicultural groups) are frequently associated with hazing, the problem is far more pervasive. Hazing can occur in almost any group that requires initiation or maintains a hierarchy. This includes:

• Fraternities and Sororities: All councils and types.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: Emphasizing tradition and loyalty, these groups can sometimes internalize harmful initiation rituals.
• Spirit Squads, Dance Teams, Cheerleading Squads: High-pressure environments focused on performance can unfortunately lead to hazing disguised as “tough love” or team building.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming, baseball, and track – professional, collegiate, and even high school teams can engage in hazing practices.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: The pursuit of excellence and intense group cohesion can, in some cases, manifest as hazing.
• Academic and Professional Organizations: Even seemingly innocuous groups can develop coercive initiation rituals.
• Cultural and Service Organizations: Groups built on positive values can still fall victim to negative internal dynamics.

Hazing persists because of deeply entrenched factors: social status, tradition, and secrecy. The desire to belong is powerful, especially for young adults navigating new social landscapes. When secrecy is enforced through threats or social exclusion, these practices continue, often behind closed doors, even when everyone “knows” hazing is illegal and dangerous. For Glasscock County students leaving home for college, this hidden culture can be a dangerous trap.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas is crucial for families in Glasscock County. It empowers you to recognize illegal activities and know what recourse may be available.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has specific anti-hazing provisions outlined in the Texas Education Code, particularly Subchapter F, Chapter 37. These laws make it clear that hazing is not just a campus policy violation; it’s a criminal offense.

In simple terms, Texas law defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed by one person alone or with others, on or off campus, 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.

Let’s break down the key implications for Glasscock County families:

• On or Off Campus: The law applies regardless of where the hazing takes place. An off-campus house party, a remote retreat outside of Midland, or a locked room in a campus building – if the other criteria are met, it’s hazing.
• Mental or Physical Harm: Hazing is not just about broken bones or alcohol poisoning. Severe psychological distress, humiliation, sleep deprivation that endangers well-being – these can all fall under the “mental health or safety” clause.
• Intent: The law doesn’t require malicious intent. If someone acts “recklessly” – meaning they essentially disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk – that’s enough to meet the definition. This means even if they “didn’t mean for anyone to get hurt,” it can still be hazing.
• “Consent” is Not a Defense: This is one of the most critical aspects of Texas law. Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that it is NOT a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the activity. This directly counters the common defense from hazers who claim, “they wanted to do it” or “everyone agreed.” The law recognizes that true consent is impossible in an environment of peer pressure, power imbalance, and the threat of exclusion.

Criminal Penalties in Texas

Hazing incidents can lead to criminal charges with penalties ranging in severity:

• Class B Misdemeanor for hazing that does not cause serious injury (punishable by up to 180 days in county jail and/or a fine up to $2,000).
• Class A Misdemeanor if the hazing causes an injury requiring medical or dental treatment (punishable by up to one year in county jail and/or a fine up to $4,000).
• State Jail Felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death (punishable by 180 days to two years in a state jail facility, and/or a fine up to $10,000). This is a serious charge with significant consequences.

Additionally, Texas law also imposes criminal penalties for:

• Failing to Report: An officer or employee of an organization, or a student who is aware of hazing, can face misdemeanor charges if they fail to report it.
• Retaliation: Retaliating against someone who reports hazing to authorities is also a misdemeanor offense.

Organizational Liability

Texas law also holds organizations accountable. Under § 37.153, organizations (such as fraternities, sororities, clubs, or teams) can be criminally prosecuted for hazing if:

• The organization authorized, requested, commanded, encouraged, or tolerated the hazing, OR
• An officer or member acting in an official capacity knew or should have known that hazing was occurring and failed to report it or take appropriate action.

Organizations found liable can face a fine of up to $10,000 per violation. Beyond criminal fines, universities frequently levy their own severe penalties, including revoking recognition, banning the organization from campus, or imposing lengthy suspensions. This is a critical point for civil lawsuits, as corporate entities must be held accountable.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

It’s important for Glasscock County families to understand that legal action for hazing can unfold across two distinct, yet often interconnected, paths: criminal and civil cases.

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (Texas, represented by county district attorneys like in Glasscock County, or the state attorney general’s office). The primary goal of a criminal case is to punish an individual or organization for violating the law. Sentences can include jail time, fines, probation, and community service. In hazing incidents, criminal charges often include specific hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, or even more severe charges like involuntary manslaughter in cases leading to death.
• Civil Cases: These are brought by the victims of hazing, or by their surviving family members in cases of wrongful death. The primary goal of a civil case is monetary compensation for the harm suffered, and to hold responsible parties (individuals, organizations, universities) accountable. Civil lawsuits focus on legal theories such as:
  • Negligence and Gross Negligence: Did the defendants fail in their duty of care, and did that failure cause harm?
  • Wrongful Death: When a death results from hazing, families can seek compensation for their profound losses.
  • Negligent Supervision/Hiring: Did the university or national organization fail to properly supervise or hire individuals who then engaged in or permitted hazing?
  • Premises Liability: Were landowners (e.g., owners of an off-campus house where hazing occurred) negligent in maintaining a safe environment?
  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: For the severe psychological trauma caused.

A crucial point for Glasscock County families: a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. The burden of proof is lower in civil court, and it’s entirely possible for a civil lawsuit to succeed even if criminal charges are not filed or do not result in a conviction. Both types of cases can, and often do, run side-by-side, each pursuing its own distinct objectives.

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

Beyond state laws, several federal regulations help shape the legal landscape and reporting requirements surrounding hazing.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation will significantly impact how colleges and universities handle hazing. It requires institutions that receive federal student aid to:
  • Report hazing incidents more transparently: Publicly disclose findings of hazing violations and disciplinary actions taken against organizations.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention: Implement robust hazing prevention programs for students.
  • Maintain public hazing data: Colleges will be required to maintain and provide publicly accessible data on hazing incidents, similar to what is currently required for other campus crimes under the Clery Act. This is being phased in by around 2026. This increased transparency will be invaluable for families choosing schools and for legal investigations.
• Title IX: While primarily known for addressing sexual harassment and assault, Title IX can come into play when hazing involves:
  • Sexual harassment or assault: Any hazing that includes unwanted sexual contact, forced nudity, or sexually degrading acts would fall under Title IX.
  • Gender-based hostility: Hazing targeted at individuals based on their gender or that creates a hostile environment for a particular gender can also trigger Title IX obligations.
  • This means universities have a federal obligation to investigate and address such hazing, regardless of where it occurred.
• 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. While hazing isn’t a standalone Clery crime category, hazing incidents often overlap with categories that are reportable, such as:
  • Assaults and aggravated assaults.
  • Alcohol and drug violations.
  • Sexual offenses.
  • This means that some hazing incidents, especially those resulting in serious injury or involving criminal acts, may be reported in an institution’s annual Clery statistics.

These federal statutes collectively push for greater transparency and accountability, providing additional avenues for victims and their families to seek justice.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

One of the complexities of hazing litigation for Glasscock County families is identifying all potential defendants. A sophisticated investigation looks beyond merely the individual students involved to uncover systemic failures. Here’s a breakdown of who can typically be held liable in a civil hazing lawsuit:

• Individual Students:
  • Those who actively planned, organized, facilitated, or carried out the hazing acts.
  • This includes “pledge educators,” chapter officers, or any member directly participating in the abuse.
  • Liability can extend to those who supplied alcohol to minors or failed to call for help in an emergency.
• Local Chapter / Organization:
  • The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself.
  • Even if not an officially recognized legal entity, local chapters can often be sued, especially if formal officers or members acting in an official capacity authorized or condoned the hazing.
  • Chapter advisors, who are often alumni or faculty advisors, can also be named if they knew or should have known about the hazing and failed to intervene.
• National Fraternity / Sorority:
  • Most Greek-letter organizations have a national headquarters that sets policies, provides risk management training, collects dues, and issues charters.
  • National organizations can be held liable if they had a history of similar hazing incidents at other chapters, indicating a pattern of foreseeability, and failed to take adequate preventative measures or enforce their anti-hazing policies.
  • Liability can also arise if they had active knowledge of the local chapter’s hazing and were deliberately indifferent. National fraternities often have deep pockets and significant insurance policies.
• University or Governing Board:
  • The educational institution itself (e.g., Texas A&M University System, University of Houston, UT System Board of Regents, SMU, Baylor).
  • Liability for universities can be based on negligence theories, such as:
    • Negligent Supervision: Failing to adequately supervise recognized student organizations.
    • Failure to Warn: Not warning students of known hazing risks or dangerous organizations.
    • Deliberate Indifference: Knowing about a pattern of hazing and failing to act.
    • Breach of Contract: If university policies against hazing are seen as part of the student’s enrollment contract.
  • Public universities (like UT, UH, A&M) may invoke sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist, particularly in cases of gross negligence, Title IX violations, or when suing individual university employees in their personal capacity. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections.
• Third Parties:
  • Landlords or Property Owners: If the hazing occurred at an off-campus house, the property owner could be liable if they knew or should have known about dangerous activities on their property and failed to act.
  • Alcohol Providers: Bars, stores, or individuals who illegally furnished alcohol to minors involved in hazing could face liability under dram shop laws or social host liability.
  • Security Companies or Event Organizers: If they were hired to ensure safety at an event where hazing occurred and failed in their duty.

Every case is fact-specific, and not every party is liable in every situation. A thorough legal investigation is necessary to identify all responsible parties and build the strongest possible case for Glasscock County families seeking justice.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragic stories of hazing victims across the United States are not just isolated incidents; they form a grim pattern that informs much of Texas hazing law and litigation. These anchor stories from around the country demonstrate common threads—forced drinking, humiliation, violence, and, critically, delayed medical care and elaborate cover-ups—that have led to profound reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements. For Glasscock County families, understanding these precedents is key to recognizing the stakes involved in any hazing incident.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Excessive alcohol consumption remains the leading cause of hazing-related deaths. These cases frequently involve a culture of forced drinking, often under the guise of “initiation” or “brotherhood/sisterhood.”

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017)
  Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after a “bid acceptance” event where he was forced to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol. Fraternity surveillance cameras captured him suffering multiple falls, including down a flight of stairs, resulting in traumatic brain injuries. Critically, his fraternity brothers waited nearly 12 hours before calling 911, attempting to move him, and even pouring liquid on him instead of seeking immediate medical attention. The aftermath saw dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation with confidential settlements, and the passage of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania, a felony hazing statute named in his honor. This case served as a stark national example of extreme intoxication, the devastating consequences of delayed medical care, and the destructive power of a culture of silence.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017)
  Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old FSU pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and forced to finish them. His blood alcohol content (BAC) was 0.447% at the time of death, a level far exceeding what the body can safely process. Multiple fraternity members were prosecuted, mostly pleading guilty to misdemeanor hazing. Florida State University immediately suspended all Greek life and overhauled its policies. This tragic event highlighted how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster and showed that universities are under pressure to take decisive action.
• Max Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017)
  Maxwell “Max” Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died from alcohol toxicity, with a BAC of 0.495%, after a “Bible study” drinking game. Pledges were forced to drink whenever they answered questions incorrectly. Max was made to lie on the floor and was barely breathing when members finally drove him to a hospital, where he died. Multiple members were charged, with one convicted of negligent homicide. In response, Louisiana passed the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute with serious prison time for causing serious injury or death. This case powerfully demonstrated that legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of systematic hazing.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021)
  Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” initiation night. Like other cases, the delay in calling 911 played a critical role in his death. His fraternity brothers deleted messages and lied to authorities in an attempted cover-up. The aftermath included multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members, with Daylen Dunson, the president, personally ordered to pay $6.5 million to the Foltz family. Bowling Green State University, a public institution, agreed to a nearly $3 million settlement with the family, and other individuals and the national fraternity also settled for substantial amounts, contributing to a $10 million total settlement. This case underscored that universities can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside the fraternities.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, hazing often involves severe physical abuse and degrading rituals, leading to serious injury or death.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College / Pi Delta Psi (2013)
  Chun “Michael” Deng, an 18-year-old pledge at a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania, was subjected to a brutal blindfolded ritual known as “the glass ceiling.” He was forced to wear a backpack filled with sand and repeatedly tackled by fraternity members. During this ritual, he suffered fatal head injuries. As with the alcohol-related deaths, help was significantly delayed by fraternity members in an effort to avoid getting caught. This unique case led to the criminal conviction of multiple individual members, and notably, the national Pi Delta Psi fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, the first time a national fraternity was convicted of a felony. The fraternity was banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years. This case definitively proved that off-campus “retreats” can be as dangerous or worse than on-campus parties, and national organizations can—and will—face serious criminal and civil sanctions.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not exclusive to Greek life. High-stakes environments like major athletic programs can also foster cultures of abuse.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025)
  Northwestern University faced a massive scandal when former football players alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. Hazing tactics included forced nudity, simulated sexual acts, and degrading rituals targeting players. This led to multiple lawsuits against Northwestern and its coaching staff, and the firing of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who later settled a wrongful-termination suit confidentially. The scandal expanded to other sports at Northwestern. This case made it abundantly clear that hazing is not limited to Greek life; major athletic programs, often with immense financial and social capital, can harbor systemic abuse and institutional failures.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national anchor stories, while happening outside of Texas, paint a clear picture of the recurring patterns of hazing. For Glasscock County families, these lessons are directly applicable:

• Common Threads: The incidents consistently feature forced drinking, physical or psychological humiliation, violence, deliberate delays in calling for medical aid, and extensive attempts at cover-ups.
• Consequences and Deterrence: They illustrate that reforms, legislative changes, and multi-million-dollar settlements often only follow after tragedy and dedicated litigation.
• Foreseeability: These cases establish a strong precedent that hazing, particularly involving alcohol, is a known and foreseeable danger. National organizations, universities, and local chapters can no longer credibly claim ignorance when similar incidents occur.
• Texas Relevance: Families facing hazing at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor are not alone. They are operating in a legal landscape significantly shaped by the difficult lessons learned from these national tragedies. An experienced Texas hazing attorney understands how to leverage these national precedents to build a strong case for accountability here in our state.

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

For families in Glasscock County, these major Texas universities represent premier educational opportunities. But like any university, they are not immune to the pervasive issue of hazing. While Glasscock County is not home to these large institutions, many students from across our region attend these schools. Understanding the specific context of hazing at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor University is crucial for parents and students making informed decisions and seeking justice.

5.1 The University of Houston (UH)

Glasscock County families sending their children to the bustling metropolis of Houston for university will find the University of Houston to be a diverse and dynamic campus. As a large urban campus, UH blends residential and commuter student life, fostering a vibrant academic and social environment. Its active Greek life, encompassing various fraternities and sororities, along with numerous other student organizations including cultural groups and sports clubs, are central to the student experience.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH has a large Greek community and a wide array of student organizations. Like many urban universities, it serves a mix of students living on campus and those commuting from the surrounding Houston metropolitan area. The culture often balances cutting-edge research with a strong community feel, but the sheer size and diverse population mean careful oversight is essential for student safety.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, prohibiting such acts both on and off campus. Their policy, consistent with Texas law, forbids any act for initiation or affiliation that endangers physical or mental health or safety. This includes, but is not limited to, forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and acts causing mental distress. UH provides several reporting channels, including the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). They also typically post a hazing statement and some disciplinary information on their website, though the level of detail publically available about incidents can vary.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Like many large universities, UH has grappled with hazing incidents within its organizations. One notable case involved the Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) fraternity chapter at UH in 2016. According to reports, pledges were allegedly deprived of sufficient food, water, and sleep during a multi-day event. The hazing culminated in a tragic incident where one student suffered a lacerated spleen, allegedly after being slammed onto a table or similar surface. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges, and the university initiated its own investigation, leading to the chapter’s suspension. While details surrounding some disciplinary actions are not always fully public, UH has demonstrated a willingness to suspend Greek fraternities and other student organizations for violations of its anti-hazing policies. Many reported incidents involve behaviors “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” often coupled with alcohol misuse and broader policy violations.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

Because UH is located in Houston, hazing incidents would typically involve law enforcement agencies like the UHPD and/or the Houston Police Department, depending on the specifics and location of the incident. Civil lawsuits for hazing against individuals, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and potentially the university itself, would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. This means navigating the local legal system and understanding the specific practices of Harris County courts and prosecutors. Potential defendants would include individual students, the local chapter and its officers, the national organization, any university employees negligent in their duties, and possibly property owners if the hazing occurred off-campus.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For Glasscock County families with students at UH, proactive steps are vital:

• Understand Reporting: Familiarize yourself with UH’s official reporting channels, including the Dean of Students’ office, the UHPD, and any online hazing reporting forms available on the university website.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: If you suspect hazing, immediately begin documenting everything: dates, times, locations, individuals involved, and any physical or mental changes observed. Crucially, screenshot all digital communications.
• Investigate Prior Incidents: While full public details might be limited, be aware of any prior complaints or known incidents involving the specific organization. An experienced attorney can often help uncover this information.
• Seek Legal Counsel Promptly: If hazing leads to significant harm, talking to a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases can help you navigate the system, preserve evidence before it’s lost or destroyed, and uncover internal university files or prior disciplinary actions. Call Attorney911 for a confidential discussion.

5.2 Texas A&M University

For many Glasscock County families, Texas A&M University in College Station holds a special place, often representing a strong tradition of Aggie pride and values. As one of the largest universities in Texas, A&M combines a rich history with a modern, sprawling campus. Its unique culture is heavily influenced by the Corps of Cadets, which, alongside a vibrant Greek life and numerous other student organizations, forms the backbone of student activities. This blend of tradition and a strong sense of community, while often positive, can also create an environment where hazing, particularly masked as “tradition” or “discipline,” can take root.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M is renowned for its deep-seated traditions, passionate alumni base, and a strong emphasis on leadership and service. The Corps of Cadets is a defining feature, influencing many aspects of campus life and instilling a military-style discipline. Alongside the Corps, A&M boasts a substantial Greek life community and countless clubs and organizations catering to diverse interests. The university fosters a sense of unity often summarized by its “Aggie family” ethos. However, this intense loyalty and adherence to tradition can, at times, become a breeding ground for hazing if not carefully monitored and consistently challenged.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M strictly prohibits hazing across all student organizations, including the Corps of Cadets and Greek life. Their policy is clear that hazing is illegal and unsafe, adhering to the Texas Education Code. Key reporting channels include the Dean of Student’s Office, the University Police Department (UPD), and specific reporting mechanisms within the Corps of Cadets. A&M emphasizes that all faculty, staff, and students have a responsibility to report hazing. Despite strong policies, incidents still occur, highlighting the challenge of enforcing rules within deeply ingrained traditions.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced its share of hazing controversies, ranging from Greek life to allegations within the venerable Corps of Cadets.

• In 2021, the Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) fraternity chapter at A&M was the subject of a disturbing lawsuit. Two pledges alleged that they were forced to engage in strenuous physical activity and then had various substances, including an industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, poured on them. This resulted in severe chemical burns requiring emergency skin graft surgeries. The pledges sued the fraternity for $1 million, and the university suspended the chapter for two years. This case highlights the extreme and dangerous nature modern hazing can take.
• The Corps of Cadets, often seen as the epitome of Aggie tradition, has also faced hazing allegations. In 2023, a Cadet filed a lawsuit alleging degrading hazing, including simulated sexual acts and being bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. He sought over $1 million in damages. While the university stated it handled the matter under its internal rules, such allegations underscore the ongoing challenge of distinguishing “tradition” from illegal hazing within the Corps.
• Past incidents have also involved various other sports clubs and Greek organizations, leading to suspensions and disciplinary actions, underscoring that the issue is widespread across A&M’s diverse student body.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents at Texas A&M, located in College Station, typically involve the College Station Police Department and/or the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) for criminal investigations. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Brazos County. Potential defendants would include the individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, any Corps staff or university faculty/staff who were negligent in their duties, and potentially the university itself. Given that Texas A&M is a public university, sovereign immunity considerations would apply if the university itself is sued, requiring claims to meet higher standards of gross negligence or specific exceptions.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For Glasscock County families with students at Texas A&M:

• Distinguish Tradition from Hazing: Educate yourselves and your students about the difference between cherished Aggie traditions and illegal hazing, particularly within the Corps of Cadets. If an activity endangers health or humiliates, it’s hazing.
• Report Promptly: Utilize A&M’s reporting channels, including the Dean of Student Life website, UPD, or the specific Corps reporting mechanisms.
• Document Everything Meticulously: Preserve all digital communications (screenshots of GroupMe, texts), photos, and notes about incidents. For unique incidents within the Corps, documentation of specific rituals can be crucial.
• Understand Institutional Context: Be aware of the university’s unique culture and its influence on how hazing is perceived and addressed. This context is important when engaging with university officials.
• Consult Experienced Counsel: Given the institution’s size and potential legal defenses, contacting an experienced hazing attorney early, especially one familiar with the Texas A&M system, is essential to navigate the process and protect your child’s rights. Call Attorney911 for a confidential discussion.

5.3 The University of Texas at Austin (UT)

Many Glasscock County students dream of becoming Longhorns, heading to the vibrant capital city for the University of Texas at Austin. UT Austin, a flagship institution, is known for its academic excellence, diverse student body, and active social scene, including a large and prominent Greek life community. While the university openly tackles the issue of hazing, incidents continue to arise across various campus organizations, emphasizing the need for Glasscock County families to be informed and vigilant.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin is a sprawling public university nestled in the heart of the state capital, offering a dynamic and often intense academic and social environment. Its campus culture is deeply intertwined with Texas history and proud traditions. Greek life is a significant component of the social fabric, alongside a vast array of student organizations, athletic programs, and spirit groups. The university actively promotes free speech and student engagement, often leading to lively campus debates and initiatives, including those focused on social justice and student safety.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas at Austin has a comprehensive and strict anti-hazing policy, clearly defining hazing as a violation of both university regulations and state law. A key aspect of UT’s approach is its public Hazing Violations page (accessible via hazing.utexas.edu, or searching “UT Austin hazing violations”). This page transparently lists organizations, the dates of their violations, the type of conduct, and the disciplinary sanctions imposed. Reporting channels are robust, including the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD), and anonymous reporting options. This transparency, while commendable, also highlights the ongoing prevalence of hazing on campus.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public hazing log provides a valuable, albeit concerning, insight into recurring issues:

• In 2023, the Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) fraternity chapter was cited when new members were directed to consume milk and then perform strenuous calisthenics, actions clearly falling under the definition of hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education. This incident, just a few years after the fatal Stone Foltz case involving Pike nationally, underscores the pattern of behavior within certain organizations.
• Other groups, including highly visible spirit organizations like the Texas Wranglers, have faced sanctions for hazing involving forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, and punishment-based practices. Entries on UT’s public log often detail violations such as “requiring excessive physical exertion,” “endangering mental or physical health,” and “harassment.”
• The repetitive nature of some entries on the public log, impacting various fraternities, sororities, sports clubs, and spirit groups, demonstrates that despite UT’s efforts at transparency and education, hazing remains a persistent challenge that demands constant vigilance.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents occurring at UT Austin would involve law enforcement agencies such as the UTPD and/or the Austin Police Department, depending on the specifics of the incident and whether it took place on or off campus within city limits. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Travis County. Potential defendants would include the individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially the university itself. As a public university, the UT System and UT Austin would likely invoke sovereign immunity, but an experienced attorney would know how to pursue the case by identifying individual liability of negligent employees or demonstrating gross negligence on the part of the institution.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

For Glasscock County families with students at UT:

• Utilize UT’s Public Log: Regularly check hazing.utexas.edu. This publicly available database can provide critical warnings about organizations with a history of violations.
• Report Effectively: Familiarize yourself with UT’s detailed reporting resources. Understanding the difference between reporting to UTPD, the Title IX Coordinator (if applicable), or the Dean of Students for student conduct can be vital.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: As always, screenshot every relevant message, photo, and video. Your child’s phone is a critical piece of evidence.
• Understand Leverage from Prior Incidents: Because UT makes past violations public, this information can powerfully support a civil suit by demonstrating a pattern of behavior and the university’s prior knowledge of an organization’s risks.
• Seek Legal Counsel Immediately: If your child has been affected by hazing at UT, contacting an experienced hazing attorney as soon as possible, one who understands the Austin legal landscape and UT’s specific policies, is crucial. Call Attorney911 for a confidential discussion.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

For many Glasscock County families, Southern Methodist University in Dallas represents a private, prestigious educational option with a vibrant social scene. SMU is known for its beautiful campus, rigorous academics, and a generally affluent student body. Its reputation is closely tied to an active Greek life and a range of social organizations. While SMU promotes a values-based education, it has also faced challenges with hazing, requiring vigilant oversight and strong responses to protect its students.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is a private, religiously affiliated university located in a prosperous neighborhood of Dallas. The campus boasts state-of-the-art facilities and a strong sense of community. Greek life plays a particularly prominent role in the social scene, influencing many aspects of student life. The university prides itself on fostering leaders and offering a personalized educational experience. This tight-knit community, while beneficial in many ways, can also amplify peer pressure and the desire for social acceptance, sometimes contributing to a culture where hazing can flourish.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Southern Methodist University maintains a clear and comprehensive anti-hazing policy that is consistent with Texas state law. Their policy emphasizes that hazing, whether on or off campus, is strictly prohibited and can result in severe disciplinary action for individuals and organizations. SMU provides multiple avenues for reporting hazing, including the Dean of Students’ office, the Office of Student Conduct, SMU Police Department, and anonymous reporting systems. These systems are designed to encourage students to come forward without fear of retaliation.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

SMU has taken action against various organizations for hazing violations over the years. One significant incident involved the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity chapter at SMU in 2017. Reports indicated that new members were allegedly subjected to physical abuse, including paddling, forced excessive alcohol consumption, and severe sleep deprivation. Following an investigation, the university suspended the chapter and imposed significant restrictions on its activities and recruiting for an extended period. This demonstrates SMU’s capacity to take decisive disciplinary action against organizations found responsible for hazing. However, like many institutions, the full details of all hazing incidents leading to disciplinary action are not always publicly available, due to privacy concerns and the university’s private status.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents near SMU, located in Dallas, would typically involve law enforcement agencies such as the SMU Police Department and/or the Dallas Police Department. Civil lawsuits would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Dallas County. Because SMU is a private institution, it generally does not benefit from the same sovereign immunity protections as public universities in Texas. This can sometimes make it more straightforward to pursue claims directly against the university for negligence in supervision or other failures. Potential defendants would include individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, the university, and potentially property owners or other third parties.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For Glasscock County families with students at SMU:

• Familiarize with SMU Resources: Understand SMU’s specific anti-hazing policies and a range of reporting methods, including any anonymous systems (like Real Response, which some universities use).
• Consider SMU’s Private Status: Recognize that as a private university, SMU may handle internal investigations somewhat differently than public institutions, and access to internal records might require different legal strategies.
• Document Everything Diligently: Preserve all digital communications, including GroupMe chats that might be used by fraternity and sorority members, photos, and detailed notes of any suspected hazing.
• Seek Experienced Legal Counsel Promptly: If hazing has impacted your child at SMU, contacting an attorney with experience in hazing cases in Dallas County and against private institutions is highly recommended. Attorney911 can help navigate the unique legal landscape.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, located in Waco and renowned for its Christian identity and strong traditions, is another prominent Texas institution where Glasscock County families may send their children. While Baylor emphasizes ethical conduct and spiritual growth, it has not been immune to hazing issues, often intertwined with its athletic programs and broader institutional challenges regarding student safety.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University is the world’s largest Baptist university, fostering a community rooted in faith and tradition. Its campus in Waco is characterized by historic architecture and a close-knit environment. Baylor pride runs deep, particularly around its successful athletic programs. The university places a strong emphasis on community and personal development. However, against this backdrop, Baylor has faced significant scrutiny in recent years over its handling of abuse allegations, notably within its football program, which has led to increased awareness and, ideally, improved oversight of all student organizations.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing across all student groups, including Greek life and athletic teams. Their policy explicitly states that hazing is illegal under Texas law and a violation of university values and student conduct codes. Baylor provides clear reporting mechanisms, including the Dean of Students’ office, the Department of Public Safety (BUPD), and an online reporting form. They aim to foster a culture where students feel safe to report concerns, and the university has made efforts to improve its institutional response to student misconduct.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history includes challenges with hazing, particularly within its high-profile athletic programs:

• In 2020, the Baylor baseball team faced a significant scandal after an investigation revealed hazing practices within the program. As a result, 14 players were suspended from the team, with these suspensions staggered over the early season. This incident, while handled internally by the university, highlighted that hazing extends beyond Greek life into athletic teams even at institutions with strong ethical codes.
• The baseball hazing incident occurred in the shadow of Baylor’s broader institutional challenges and scrutiny regarding its handling of sexual assault allegations within the football program. This context means that Baylor operates under an increased obligation (and public expectation) for rigorous oversight of all student conduct, including hazing.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents at Baylor, located in Waco, would typically involve law enforcement agencies such as the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) and/or the Waco Police Department. Civil lawsuits would generally be filed in courts with jurisdiction over McLennan County. As a private university, Baylor does not have sovereign immunity, meaning claims against the institution itself for negligence, negligent supervision, or other failures would generally proceed without that specific governmental defense. Potential defendants would include individual students, local organization chapters, national organizations, the university itself, and any coaches, advisors, or faculty negligent in their duties.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

For Glasscock County families with students at Baylor:

• Be Aware of Baylor’s Context: Understand that Baylor operates under increased public and ethical scrutiny due to past athletic scandals. This should, in theory, create a greater impetus for thorough hazing investigations.
• Utilize Baylor’s Reporting Systems: Familiarize yourself with the Dean of Students’ office, BUPD, and online reporting options. Transparent reporting is critical.
• Document Everything Rigorously: Just like at any other institution, collecting and preserving all evidence – digital messages, photos, videos, and detailed notes – is paramount.
• Seek Legal Counsel Early: If your child has been affected by hazing at Baylor, contacting an attorney experienced in hazing cases in McLennan County and against private institutions is highly advisable. Attorney911 can help navigate these sensitive cases against the university and affiliated organizations, ensuring your family’s rights are protected.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For families in Glasscock County, understanding the connection between local chapters at major Texas universities and their national organizations is vital. Hazing is rarely an isolated act; it’s often a script, passed down through generations, and variations of it play out repeatedly across different chapters of the same national fraternity or sorority.

Why National Histories Matter

Most Greek-letter organizations present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor (such as Pi Kappa Alpha, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, Kappa Alpha Order, and many others) are part of large national organizations. These national entities often mandate thick anti-hazing manuals and implement risk management policies. This isn’t out of altruism; it’s because they have a documented history of deaths, catastrophic injuries, and multi-million-dollar lawsuits at their chapters across the country. They know the patterns: forced drinking nights, paddling traditions, psychologically humiliating rituals – these are recurring problems within their system.

This direct knowledge of past incidents at other chapters is crucial in legal strategy. When a Texas chapter repeats the same dangerous script that led to a death or serious injury at another chapter in Ohio, Florida, or Pennsylvania, it provides strong evidence of foreseeability. It suggests that the national organization knew, or should have known, that such hazing was a risk, and that their anti-hazing policies were, at best, insufficient, and at worst, merely “paper policies” designed to evade liability. This evidence can significantly strengthen negligence arguments and open the door to punitive damages against national entities.

Organization Mapping: Local Chapters & National Histories

While we cannot list every single chapter at every Texas university, it is important to connect some of the major fraternities and sororities to their national hazing histories. This is not to defame, but to illustrate a pattern of behavior and to provide Glasscock County families with knowledge about known risks.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike)
  • Description: A large national fraternity with chapters at many Texas universities, including UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin.
  • National Hazing History: Pike has a particularly grim national hazing history. Stone Foltz’s fatal alcohol poisoning at Bowling Green State University in 2021 during a “Big/Little” event led to a $10 million settlement and strengthened anti-hazing laws. Another pledge, David Bogenberger, died from alcohol poisoning at Northern Illinois University in 2012, resulting in a $14 million settlement. These cases demonstrate a recurring pattern of forced alcohol consumption, particularly during “Big/Little” initiation events, within the Pike national organization.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE)
  • Description: A prominent national fraternity with chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU.
  • National Hazing History: SAE has faced multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries nationwide over the past decades. This led to their controversial (and short-lived) attempt to ban pledging entirely in 2014. Recent lawsuits reveal ongoing issues: a pledge at the University of Alabama (2023) allegedly suffered a traumatic brain injury during hazing, while a $1 million lawsuit was filed against the Texas A&M chapter (2021) after pledges suffered severe chemical burns from industrial-strength cleaner, eggs, and spit. The UT Austin chapter also faced a lawsuit in January 2024 after an exchange student alleged severe assault at a party. These incidents suggest a pattern of physical and chemical hazing, often involving substance abuse.
• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ)
  • Description: Another major national fraternity with chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor.
  • National Hazing History: Phi Delta Theta is tragically linked to the death of Maxwell “Max” Gruver at Louisiana State University in 2017. Max died from alcohol toxicity after being forced to participate in a “Bible study” drinking game. His death led to the passing of the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute in Louisiana. This incident underscores the ongoing risk of forced alcohol consumption within the organization.
• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ)
  • Description: A national fraternity with chapters at UH and Texas A&M.
  • National Hazing History: Pi Kappa Phi was involved in the death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University in 2017. Coffey died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event where pledges were given handles of hard liquor to finish. This case further highlights the dangers of traditional alcohol-fueled initiation rituals.
• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ)
  • Description: A national fraternity with chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU.
  • National Hazing History: Penn State’s Timothy Piazza died in 2017 after a Beta Theta Pi “bid acceptance” event involving extreme alcohol consumption. His traumatic brain injuries, falls, and the agonizing delay in seeking medical help (captured on fraternity cameras) led to one of the largest hazing prosecutions in U.S. history and Pennsylvania’s Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law. This case is a benchmark for institutional negligence and criminal culpability.
• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI)
  • Description: A national fraternity with a chapter at Texas A&M.
  • National Hazing History: Danny Santulli, a pledge at the University of Missouri, suffered severe, permanent brain damage in 2021 after being forced to consume excessive alcohol during a “pledge dad reveal” night. He now requires 24/7 care. His family settled lawsuits with 22 defendants, including the fraternity, reportedly for multi-million-dollar amounts. This case is a harrowing example of catastrophic non-fatal hazing injury resulting in lifelong devastation.
• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ)
  • Description: A national fraternity with chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor.
  • National Hazing History: Kappa Sigma has a significant national hazing history. Chad Meredith, an 18-year-old freshman at the University of Miami, died by drowning in 2001 after being persuaded by fraternity members to swim across a lake while intoxicated. A jury awarded his parents a $12.6 million verdict, leading to a Florida law named in his honor that criminalized hazing. More recently, allegations of hazing resulting in severe injuries (rhabdomyolysis – severe muscle breakdown from extreme physical hazing) at Texas A&M University are leading to ongoing litigation (2023).

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

These patterns across states and campuses are not mere coincidences. They illustrate that certain national organizations have received repeated, tragic warnings about the dangers inherent in their (or their chapters’) “traditions.” For Glasscock County families, this means that courts and juries can and will consider whether these national organizations:

• Meaningfully enforced their anti-hazing policies or simply had them on paper.
• Responded to prior incidents aggressively enough to deter future wrongdoing.
• Bear responsibility for creating a culture where such acts were tolerated or even encouraged.

This pattern evidence can profoundly affect:

• Settlement Leverage: Demonstrating a pattern strengthens the victim’s position in negotiations.
• Insurance Coverage Disputes: It makes it harder for national organizations and universities to deny coverage based on “unforeseeable” acts.
• Potential for Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, where a national organization shows deliberate indifference to known risks, pattern evidence can justify punitive damages designed to punish and deter.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

When the unthinkable happens and your child is a victim of hazing, understanding how a legal case is built is crucial. For Glasscock County families, this often means navigating a complex legal system where every piece of evidence, every detail, matters. At The Manginello Law Firm, we specialize in meticulously investigating hazing incidents, understanding that the powerful institutions involved will deploy significant resources to defend themselves.

Evidence

The modern hazing landscape means that much of the critical evidence is digital, but physical and testimonial evidence remain vital. Our firm works quickly to secure and preserve all available evidence, often using methods outlined in Attorney911’s video on using your phone to document evidence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs).

• Digital Communications
  These are frequently the most compelling pieces of evidence. We work to obtain and analyze:
  • GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, and other messaging apps: These platforms are often used by organizations to coordinate hazing, give instructions, mock pledges, and even discuss cover-ups. We look for explicit directives, coded language, and indications of coercion.
  • Instagram DMs, Snapchat messages, TikTok comments: Social media can reveal forced participation, humiliation, and discussions surrounding hazing.
  • Both live and recovered/deleted messages: Digital forensics can often recover messages that individuals thought they had permanently erased.
• Photos & Videos
  Content captured by participants themselves, or by witnesses, can be damning:
  • Content filmed by members: Often found in group chats or on social media, these can show hazing in progress, injuries, or individuals being forced to participate.
  • Security camera footage: From campus buildings, off-campus houses with Ring or similar doorbell cameras, or nearby businesses.
  • Your own documentation: Photos of injuries, damaged property, or specific locations. Our video “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) offers best practices for this.
• Internal Organization Documents
  These provide insight into the organization’s rules, culture, and any attempts to mislead:
  • Pledge manuals, initiation scripts, tradition guides: These might contain explicit hazing instructions or veiled references to abusive practices.
  • Emails/texts from officers: Communications about events, “pledge tasks,” or discussions about avoiding detection.
  • National policies and training materials: These often show that national organizations knew the risks but failed to enforce their own rules effectively.
• University Records
  Through subpoenas and public records requests (for public universities like UT, UH, or A&M), we obtain:
  • Prior conduct files: Records of past hazing violations, probation, suspensions, and letters of warning against the same organization. This is especially true for institutions like UT Austin, which maintains a public hazing log.
  • Incident reports: Documentation from campus police, student conduct offices, or Title IX coordinators.
  • Clery reports and similar disclosures: Annual campus safety statistics that may include hazing-related offenses.
• Medical and Psychological Records
  These document the full extent of the harm suffered:
  • Emergency room and hospitalization records: For immediate physical injuries, alcohol poisoning, or drug overdose.
  • Surgery and rehabilitation notes: Chronicling the long road to recovery for major injuries.
  • Toxicology reports: Confirming the presence of alcohol or drugs.
  • Psychological evaluations: Diagnosing PTSD, depression, anxiety, or other mental health impacts. These are vital for establishing non-economic damages.
• Witness Testimony
  Statements from individuals who saw or know about the hazing:
  • Other pledges, current members, roommates, coaches, trainers, RAs, or bystanders: Even those initially reluctant to speak can often be compelled through the legal process.
  • Former members who quit or were expelled: These individuals often have valuable, unbiased information about the organization’s true culture.

Damages

Our goal is not just to prove what happened, but to recover full and fair compensation for all losses suffered. This includes both economic and non-economic damages.

• Economic Damages
  These are quantifiable financial losses resulting from the hazing:
  • Medical bills & future care: Covering emergency room visits, hospital stays, surgeries, ongoing physical therapy, medications, and mental health counseling. For catastrophic injuries, this can include a “life care plan” to cover lifelong needs.
  • Lost earnings / educational impact: Compensation for missed semesters, tuition costs if a student had to withdraw, delayed entry into the workforce, and reduced earning capacity if permanent injuries impact a career path.
• Non-Economic Damages
  These compensate for intangible losses, which are often the most profound:
  • Physical pain and suffering: From the immediate injuries and any ongoing chronic pain.
  • Emotional distress, trauma, and humiliation: Including compensation for PTSD, anxiety, depression, and the deep psychological scars of being degraded.
  • Loss of enjoyment of life: When hazing robs a student of their passion for activities, their social life, or their overall quality of life.
• Wrongful Death Damages (for families)
  When hazing leads to a tragic death, surviving family members – parents, siblings, children, or spouses – can pursue a wrongful death claim to recover for profound losses:
  • Funeral and burial costs.
  • Loss of financial support the deceased would have provided.
  • Loss of companionship, love, and society from the deceased.
  • Grief and emotional suffering experienced by the family.

We thoroughly analyze every aspect of the harm suffered to ensure all compensable damages are sought.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

A crucial part of our strategy is identifying all potential defendants and understanding their insurance coverage. National fraternities, national sororities, and universities typically carry substantial liability insurance policies. However, insurers are often reluctant to pay out for hazing claims and will deploy various tactics to deny coverage.

• Insurance Company Arguments: Insurers might argue that hazing or “intentional acts” are explicitly excluded from coverage. They may claim the incident was unforeseeable or that the policy doesn’t cover certain defendants.
• Our Counter-Strategy: The Manginello Law Firm, with Lupe Peña’s invaluable background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), knows exactly how insurance companies operate. We anticipate their arguments and effectively counter them. We argue that even if certain acts were intentional, the core negligence was in the failure to supervise, the failure to warn, or the deliberate indifference to known risks – actions that are typically covered by insurance. We also meticulously identify all potential coverage sources, including individual policies of involved students, local chapter policies, and university umbrella policies, leaving no stone unturned. Our experience helps us navigate these complex disputes, pushing for fair settlements or preparing for trial if negotiations fail.

Practical Guides & FAQs

For Glasscock County parents and students facing the emotional and legal complexities of hazing, knowing what to do next can be overwhelming. This section offers practical, actionable advice, straight from our experience as Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

8.1 For Parents

Suspecting your child is being hazed is a terrifying experience. Here’s how to recognize the signs and what steps you can take to protect them:

• Warning Signs of Hazing
  Be vigilant for subtle and overt changes:
  • Unexplained injuries or repeated “accidents” with inconsistent stories.
  • Sudden, extreme exhaustion or severe sleep deprivation.
  • Drastic changes in mood, increased anxiety, depression, or withdrawal from activities they once loved.
  • Constant secret phone use for group chats, especially late at night, and a fear of missing “mandatory” events.
  • Reluctance to talk about their organization, often saying things like “I can’t talk about it” or “it’s a secret.”
  • Unexpected and unexplained financial burdens, such as requests for money they can’t fully explain.
• How to Talk to Your Child
  Approaching this conversation requires immense sensitivity:
  • Ask open-ended questions, like “How are you really doing?” or “What’s the hardest part about being a new member?”
  • Avoid judgmental language or accusations. Frame your concerns from a place of love and safety.
  • Emphasize that their safety and well-being are your top priorities, far above any organizational status or loyalty.
  • Reassure them that you will support them without judgment, no matter what they tell you.
• If Your Child is Hurt
  Prioritize medical care and evidence collection:
  • Immediately get them medical attention. Do not delay. Document all injuries with clear, multiple-angle photos.
  • Document everything thoroughly. Keep detailed notes of dates, times, locations, individuals involved, and everything your child tells you.
  • Preserve all evidence: Screenshot digital messages, take photos of physical items, and save any receipts for forced purchases.
• Dealing with the University
  University administrators may attempt to control the narrative:
  • Document every communication with campus officials. Keep records of who you spoke to, when, and what was discussed.
  • Ask specifically about any prior incidents involving the same organization and what the school did or didn’t do in response.
  • Do not sign anything from the university or insurance company without legal advice (see “Critical Mistakes” below).
• When to Talk to a Lawyer
  Contact an attorney early if:
  • Your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm.
  • You feel the university or organization is minimizing, stonewalling, or hiding what happened.

8.2 For Students / Pledges

We speak directly to you, the student, who might be feeling trapped, confused, or scared. Your rights and your safety matter.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition?
  If you’re asking this question, it’s a warning sign. Ask yourself:
  • Do you feel unsafe, humiliated, or coerced?
  • Are you forced to drink alcohol or consume other substances?
  • Are you enduring physical pain, sleep deprivation, or psychological torment?
  • Are you being told to keep secrets from family, friends, or administrators, or to hide your activities?
  • If the activity is hidden from the public or administrators – it probably is hazing.
    If you answered yes to any of these, it’s very likely hazing, regardless of what they call it.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story
  We understand the immense pressure to “fit in” or “prove yourself.” You might feel like you “agreed” to certain activities. However, Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. The law recognizes that true consent is often impossible in situations with strong power dynamics, fear of exclusion, and implicit threats. You are the victim here, not a willing participant in illegal activities.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely
  Your safety is paramount:
  • If you are in immediate danger, call 911 immediately.
  • If you wish to leave the organization, inform a trusted adult outside the group (parent, RA, academic advisor) first.
  • Send a clear, written message (email or text) to the organization’s leadership stating your resignation. There is no need for a “final meeting” where you might be pressured or intimidated.
  • Report privately or anonymously: Utilize campus channels like your Dean of Students or counseling center, or use anonymous tip lines like the National Anti-Hazing Hotline (1-888-NOT-HAZE).
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty
  Texas law and many university policies encourage reporting. In an emergency, if you call for help for someone in distress, you are often granted immunity from legal repercussions, even if you or others were involved in underage drinking or drug use. Your safety, and the safety of others, comes first.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were once part of a hazing incident, or witnessed it, and now carry guilt or regret, we want you to know that there is a path forward.

• Your testimony and evidence may prevent future harm and save lives. Coming forward can be a powerful act of justice, providing crucial insight into the organization’s culture and ensuring accountability.
• While you may want your own legal advice regarding your involvement, cooperating with an investigation can be an important step toward accountability for victims and can sometimes mitigate your own exposure by showing intent to do good.
• Our lawyers can help you navigate your role as a witness or even a co-defendant, ensuring your rights are protected while facilitating your cooperation in bringing justice to victims.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

Glasscock County families, please heed this warning: The actions you take—or don’t take—in the immediate aftermath of a suspected hazing incident can significantly impact any potential legal case. Avoid these common, often catastrophic, mistakes:

1. Letting Your Child Delete Messages or “Clean Up” Evidence.
   • What parents think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble, so let’s erase everything.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This looks like a deliberate cover-up, can constitute obstruction of justice, and makes proving your claim nearly impossible. Digital forensics can often recover deleted data, but original screenshots are always best.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing or supposedly incriminating content. Take screenshots of all group chats, texts, and social media.
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: This immediately puts the organization on high alert. They will stop hazing, lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defenses, making an investigation harder.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in private. Then, call an experienced hazing attorney before initiating any direct confrontation.
3. Signing University “Release” or “Resolution” Forms.
   • What universities do: They may pressure families to sign waivers or agree to “internal resolution” that promises swift action but minimal transparency.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue a lawsuit. These agreements often result in settlements far below the true value of your case and prioritize the university’s image over accountability.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university without having an attorney review it first.
4. Posting Details on Social Media Before Talking to a Lawyer.
   • What families think: “I want people to know what happened to warn others.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Anything posted online can be used by defense attorneys, creating inconsistencies, hurting credibility, and potentially waiving your right to privacy or confidentiality in a lawsuit.
   • What to do instead: Document privately. Share only with your attorney, who can control public messaging strategically.
5. Letting Your Child Go Back to “One Last Meeting.”
   • What fraternities/sororities say: “Just 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 your child, intimidate them, or extract statements that can later be used against them in a legal context.
   • What to do instead: If you are considering legal action, all communication from your child to the organization should cease and be routed through your lawyer.
6. Waiting “to See How the University Handles It.”
   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating; please let us handle this internally to protect your child’s privacy.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Evidence rapidly disappears. Witnesses graduate or scatter. The statute of limitations continues to run. The university’s internal process is geared towards institutional compliance, not necessarily full victim compensation or justice.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW and consult a lawyer immediately. Pursuing a full legal claim is a different track than a university’s internal investigation.
7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer.
   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim quickly and fairly.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Recorded statements can be cherry-picked and used against you. Early settlement offers are almost always lowball and do not account for future medical or psychological needs. Insurance adjusters work for the insurance company, not for you.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline their calls 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 (like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, and UT Austin) benefit from some sovereign immunity protections, but exceptions exist for cases involving gross negligence, Title IX violations (if discrimination or sexual harassment is involved), and when suing individual employees in their personal capacity. Private universities (like SMU and 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?”
  Yes, it can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default. However, it becomes a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. This means jail time and significant fines are possible. Individual officers within an organization can also face misdemeanor charges for failing to report known 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. The law recognizes that “consent” given under peer pressure, power imbalance, or fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent. Courts consistently rule against this defense in hazing cases.
• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”
  Generally, you have two years from the date of injury or death to file a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit in Texas. 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 in hazing cases—evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, and organizations work to destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to ensure your rights are protected.
• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of the hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities or other organizations can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and foreseeability of the event, even if it happened off-campus. Many major hazing cases (like the Pi Delta Psi retreat death or the Sigma Pi unofficial house death) occurred off-campus and still resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments.
• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  Most hazing cases settle confidentially before trial, meaning details are not made public. While suing for public accountability sometimes involves public proceedings, we prioritize your family’s privacy and work to request sealed court records and confidential settlement terms when possible. We’ll discuss your options regarding privacy thoroughly during your consultation.

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—national fraternities, wealthy universities, and their insurance carriers—fight back, and how to win anyway. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, we provide exactly that: tough, experienced advocates who genuinely care.

From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Glasscock County and surrounding areas. We understand that hazing at Texas universities can deeply impact families from communities like Big Spring and Garden City. Our firm brings a unique blend of skills and experience crucial for these complex cases:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable experience as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She knows their tactics – how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims, their delay tactics, coverage exclusion arguments, and settlement strategies. We know their playbook because we used to run it. Her complete credentials and background as a native Texan are detailed at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Led by Ralph P. Manginello, our firm is not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their well-funded defense teams. Ralph was one of the few Texas attorneys involved in the historic BP Texas City explosion litigation, demonstrating our capacity to take on billion-dollar corporations and win. Our extensive federal court experience (United States District Court, Southern District of Texas) means we are equipped for the most challenging cases, including Title IX, civil rights, and complex multi-district litigation. Ralph Manginello’s complete credentials and case history are detailed at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have a proven track record in complex wrongful death cases, collaborating with economists to value profound losses, and carefully assessing lifetime care needs for victims with brain injuries or permanent disabilities.
• Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides a deep understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual expertise means we can advise witnesses and former members who may face both civil and criminal exposure, guiding them through difficult decisions. Our criminal defense experience (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/) means we understand the full spectrum of legal challenges.
• Investigative Depth: We leverage a vast network of experts—medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists—to build comprehensive cases. We excel at obtaining hidden evidence often crucial in hazing cases, such as deleted group chats, social media evidence, subpoenaed national fraternity records, and university files through discovery and public records requests. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

We understand that hazing cases are profoundly personal and devastating. We know this is one of the hardest things a family can face. Our job is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We balance compassionate client advocacy with aggressive legal action, driven by a commitment to thorough investigation and real accountability.

Your Call to Action

If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus—whether it’s at Texas A&M, UT Austin, the University of Houston, SMU, Baylor, or another institution—we want to hear from you. Families in Glasscock 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 for your family.

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We will listen to your story without judgment, providing a safe space to share.
• We’ll review any evidence you have, such as photos, texts, social media screenshots, or medical records.
• We will clearly explain your legal options: whether to pursue a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• We will discuss realistic timelines and what you can expect during the legal process.
• We will answer your questions about costs, as we work on a contingency fee basis – we don’t get paid unless we win your case. You can learn more about how contingency fees work in our video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc.
• There’s no pressure to hire us on the spot – take the time you need to decide what’s best.
• Everything you tell us is confidential.

You don’t have to face this alone. Let our experience be your strength.

Call us today:

• Toll-Free: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
• Direct: (713) 528-9070
• Cell: (713) 443-4781
• Website: https://attorney911.com
• Email: ralph@atty911.com

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

Whether you’re in Glasscock County or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, turn to the Legal Emergency Lawyers™. 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