The Definitive Guide to Hazing in Texas: What Montague County Families Need to Know

The crisp autumn air settled over a Texas college campus, carrying the echoes of chants from an off-campus house where a fraternity initiation was underway. Inside, a young student, eager to belong, was being pushed to consume a dangerous amount of alcohol, peer pressure mounting with every gulp. He swayed, his vision blurring, as older members filmed his struggle on their phones, their faces a mixture of exhilaration and casual disregard. A few looked concerned, but no one moved to intervene, fearful of “breaking tradition” or “getting the chapter shut down.” When he finally collapsed, silence fell, quickly followed by panicked whispers about what to do, or more importantly, what not to do. He lay motionless, trapped between the unspoken code of loyalty to the group and his desperate need for safety.

This scenario, tragically, is not uncommon. It’s a reality that can unfold at any Texas university—including those where families from Montague County and its surrounding communities send their children. Whether your student attends the sprawling campuses of the University of Houston, the traditions-rich environment of Texas A&M, the vibrant culture of UT Austin, the close-knit community of SMU, or the faith-based setting of Baylor University, the risk of hazing is a pervasive concern that crosses all types of collegiate life.

We understand that for families in Montague County, navigating the complexities of college life and ensuring your child’s safety is paramount. The small-town charm of communities like Bowie, Nocona, or Saint Jo might feel a world away from the larger university settings, yet the potential for hazing connects these worlds directly. A student from Montague County, growing up enjoying the natural beauty of the Red River or the historical significance of the Chisholm Trail, might suddenly find themselves in an alien environment where peer pressure takes a dangerous turn. Understanding this risk and knowing what to do if it touches your family is crucial.

This guide serves as a comprehensive resource for families in Montague County and across Texas seeking to understand hazing in its modern forms, the legal frameworks designed to combat it, and the pathways to accountability and justice. We will delve into:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, moving beyond outdated stereotypes to reveal its subtle, insidious, and often violent manifestations.
• The specifics of Texas and federal anti-hazing laws, outlining the rights and protections available to students and families.
• The critical lessons learned from major national hazing cases and how these precedents impact families and institutions here in Texas.
• A detailed look at incidents and patterns at the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor University, highlighting the unique challenges and historical contexts of each institution.
• How the national organizations behind fraternities and sororities contribute to the problem and why their histories are crucial in building a legal case.
• The intricate process of building a hazing lawsuit, from evidence collection to understanding potential damages, and the strategies we employ to navigate complex legal defenses.
• Practical, actionable guidance for parents, students, and witnesses, providing a roadmap for recognizing hazing, responding to it, and ensuring safety while preserving critical evidence.

This article offers general information and insights, not specific legal advice for individual cases. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC is a team of experienced legal professionals here to evaluate individual situations based on their unique facts. We serve families throughout Texas, including Montague County, with a commitment to seeking justice and preventing future tragedies.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

In the first 48 hours:

• Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.” Prioritize their health and safety above all else.
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages (DMs) immediately.
  • Photograph injuries from multiple angles and document their progression over time.
  • Save any physical items that might be evidence, such as clothing, receipts for forced purchases, or objects used in hazing.
• Write down everything while memory is fresh: who, what, when, where, and how it happened.
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity/sorority or other organization directly, as this may lead to evidence destruction or coached witnesses guarding information.
  • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company, which could waive your legal rights.
  • Post details on public social media, as this can compromise a potential legal case.
  • Let your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence, even if they are embarrassed.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

• Evidence disappears fast, from deleted group chats and destroyed paddles to witnesses who are coached on what to say or simply forget details.
• Universities and organizations often move quickly to control the narrative or conduct internal investigations that may not align with your child’s best interests.
• We can help preserve critical evidence and protect your child’s legal rights during what is often a chaotic and confusing time.
• Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Montague County families, the image of hazing might still be rooted in movies or outdated media. Perhaps you envision mild pranks or innocent initiations. However, the reality of hazing in 2025 is far darker, more sophisticated, and often terrifyingly dangerous. It’s no longer just “a dumb prank” or “just partying”; it’s a pervasive problem that can endanger physical and mental health, with severe, life-altering consequences.

Hazing is broadly defined as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed on or off-campus by one person alone or with others, directed against a student, that endangers the 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. It’s crucial to understand that a student’s “agreement” to participate does not automatically make it safe or legal. When there is peer pressure, a significant power imbalance, and the threat of social exclusion or failure to officially join a group, “consent” is not freely given and often rendered meaningless in the eyes of the law.

Main Categories of Hazing

Modern hazing manifests in various insidious forms, often escalating without clear boundaries. Understanding these categories is vital for recognizing hazing when it occurs.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is one of the most common and deadliest forms. It involves forced or coerced drinking of excessive amounts of alcohol, often rapidly. Examples include “chugging challenges,” “lineups” where pledges consume multiple shots, or “games” that require continuous, dangerous consumption. There’s also pressure to consume unknown substances or other drugs, raising the stakes to potentially lethal levels.
• Physical Hazing: This category involves acts that directly endanger physical well-being. It can range from brutal paddling and beatings to extreme “workouts” or “smokings” (forced, hours-long calisthenics) far beyond safe limits, often designed to break down individuals physically. Sleep deprivation, food and water restriction, and exposure to extreme cold or heat (like being locked outside or in freezing rooms) are also common tactics. These activities are falsely labeled as “team-building exercises” or “endurance tests.”
• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This type exploits and degrades individuals. It includes forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (such as the infamous “elephant walk” or “roasted pig” positions), and degrading costumes or roles designed to embarrass. This form of hazing can be particularly traumatizing, often incorporating acts with racial, sexist, or homophobic undertones, slurs, or forced role-play that targets marginalized groups.
• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but deeply damaging, psychological hazing involves sustained verbal abuse, threats, and intentional isolation. Members often use manipulation, forced confessions, and public shaming—whether in person, on social media, or in closed-door meetings—to exert control and instill fear. This can lead to long-term mental health issues, including severe anxiety, depression, and PTSD.
• Digital/Online Hazing: With the rise of technology, hazing has moved into the digital realm. This includes group chat dares, challenges, and public humiliation orchestrated via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Discord, and various fraternity-specific apps. Pledges might be pressured to create or share compromising images or videos, or constantly monitor their phones for mandatory messages, resulting in extreme sleep deprivation and anxiety.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

The misconception that hazing is limited to “frat boys” is dangerous. While Greek life certainly has a historical association with hazing, this harmful practice infiltrates a wide array of collegiate organizations. Hazing can happen in:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes traditional Interfraternity Council (IFC) and Panhellenic Council (NPC) organizations, but also National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) “Divine Nine” groups and various multicultural, professional, and service Greek organizations.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: The structured, hierarchical nature of these groups can unfortunately be exploited, leading to hazing under the guise of “discipline” or “earning respect.” Texas A&M’s Corps of Cadets, with its rich traditions, has faced scrutiny over such incidents.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs, and Student Groups: Organizations like college spirit groups, unique tradition clubs (similar to the once-notorious Texas Cowboys at UT), or other social and cultural associations.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming, baseball, and cheerleading, hazing can occur across varsity, club, and intramural sports. The “team-building” rhetoric often masks abusive practices.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign groups dedicated to the arts or music have faced hazing allegations, often involving psychological abuse, sleep deprivation, or physical stress.
• Other Organizations: Some service, academic, or social clubs can also foster environments where hazing takes root, driven by social status, exclusivity, and a misplaced desire for “tradition.”

Whether driven by a misguided sense of tradition, group loyalty, or a perverse initiation ritual, social status and secrecy are powerful forces that keep these practices alive. Despite widespread awareness campaigns and explicit prohibitions, hazing persists because members are often coached to hide it, fear retaliation, or genuinely believe it’s a necessary part of “bonding.” For Montague County students entering these environments, understanding the hidden dangers is the first step toward self-protection.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

For families in Montague County, understanding the legal framework surrounding hazing can feel daunting. However, Texas law provides specific protections and avenues for accountability. It’s crucial to grasp how both state and federal statutes, alongside civil litigation, work to address hazing.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has clear, specific anti-hazing provisions primarily housed within the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This comprehensive statute governs hazing at educational institutions throughout the state, including all universities and colleges.

The law broadly defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed on or off-campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student, that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student 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 some critical aspects of the Texas statute:

• Location Doesn’t Matter: The law explicitly states “on or off campus.” This means whether hazing occurs in a dorm room, at an off-campus fraternity house, an Airbnb, or a remote retreat down the road from Nocona, it’s still covered by Texas law.
• Mental or Physical Harm: Hazing isn’t just about physical injury. Acts that “substantially affect the mental health or safety” are also prohibited. This includes extreme humiliation, prolonged psychological abuse, intimidation, and sustained sleep deprivation.
• “Intent” is Broadly Defined: The act doesn’t have to be malicious. If someone acted “recklessly”—meaning they knew the risk of harm but proceeded anyway—that’s enough to meet the legal standard.
• Consent is Not a Defense: This is a cornerstone of Texas hazing law. As per Texas Education Code § 37.155, “It is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the hazing activity.” This recognizes the inherent power imbalance and peer pressure involved, rendering any supposed “consent” invalid.

Criminal Penalties for Hazing in Texas:

Texas law outlines various criminal penalties for hazing, emphasizing the severity of the offense:

• By default, hazing that does not cause serious injury is a Class B Misdemeanor. This can carry penalties of up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• If hazing causes injury requiring medical treatment, it can be elevated to a Class A Misdemeanor, with potential penalties of up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $4,000.
• Most critically, if hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it is classified as a State Jail Felony. This can lead to significant prison time (180 days to 2 years) and fines up to $10,000.
• The law also criminalizes failing to report hazing. If an officer or a member of an organization knew about hazing and failed to report it, they can face misdemeanor charges.
• Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor offense.

Organizational Liability:

Under Texas Education Code § 37.153, organizations themselves (fraternities, sororities, clubs, teams) can be held criminally responsible for hazing if they authorized or encouraged it, 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 revocation of university recognition.

Reporter Protections:

The law also provides crucial protections for those who come forward. Texas Education Code § 37.154 grants immunity from civil or criminal liability to individuals who report a hazing incident in good faith to university or law enforcement authorities. Furthermore, Texas law, along with many university policies, offers medical amnesty for students who call 911 in an emergency, even if underage drinking or hazing was involved, encouraging seeking help without fear of personal penalty.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

It’s important for Montague County families to understand that a hazing incident can lead to two distinct legal tracks: criminal and civil cases.

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated and pursued by the state (prosecutors) on behalf of the public. Their primary goal is to punish those who have broken the law, through incarceration, fines, or probation. Common hazing-related criminal charges, beyond the hazing offenses themselves, can include furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, and even negligent homicide or manslaughter in cases of serious injury or death.
• Civil Cases: These are brought by victims or their surviving families against the individuals and organizations responsible for the harm. The core purpose of a civil lawsuit is to seek monetary compensation for the damages suffered and to hold parties accountable. These cases often involve claims of negligence, gross negligence, wrongful death, negligent hiring or supervision, premises liability, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Crucially, these two processes can run concurrently, and a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for pursuing a successful civil claim. The standard of proof in civil cases (preponderance of the evidence) is lower than in criminal cases (beyond a reasonable doubt), meaning that even if criminal charges are not filed or do not result in a conviction, civil liability can still be established.

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

Beyond state laws, federal regulations also play a role in addressing hazing, particularly for universities receiving federal funding.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation significantly increases transparency and accountability for colleges and universities. It mandates that institutions receiving federal aid must publicly report hazing incidents, strengthen their hazing education and prevention programs, and maintain easily accessible public data on hazing violations and disciplinary actions. This public reporting mechanism (to be fully implemented by around 2026) will provide families in Montague County and nationwide with invaluable information about which organizations and campuses have a history of hazing.
• Title IX: This federal law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded education programs. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based violence, or hostile environments based on sex, Title IX obligations are triggered. This can lead to university investigations and potential legal action separate from, or in addition to, state hazing laws.
• 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 not directly a hazing law, hazing incidents often overlap with Clery-reportable crimes such as assault, liquor law violations, drug offenses, and even sexual offenses, contributing to a university’s publicly available crime statistics.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Determining who can be held responsible in a civil hazing lawsuit is critical for seeking justice. Liability often extends far beyond the immediate perpetrators:

• Individual Students: These are the primary actors who planned, organized, supplied alcohol, carried out, or directly participated in the hazing acts. Their individual negligence or intentional actions can lead to personal liability.
• Local Chapter / Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself (if structured as a legal entity) can be held liable. This includes the chapter’s leadership, officers, and members who were aware of or actively participated in the hazing.
• National Fraternity / Sorority: Most local chapters are part of larger national organizations. These national bodies set policies, provide guidance, collect dues, and often claim oversight over their chapters. Their liability can stem from:
  • Negligent Supervision: Failing to adequately supervise or train local chapters.
  • Failure to Enforce Policies: Ignoring or weakly enforcing their own anti-hazing rules despite knowledge of prior incidents.
  • Pattern Evidence: Showing that similar hazing incidents occurred in other chapters of the same national organization, demonstrating foreseeability.
• University or Governing Board: Colleges and universities can be held liable under various theories:
  • Negligence: If the school failed to adequately supervise, warn, or protect students, especially if they knew or should have known about hazing.
  • Gross Negligence / Deliberate Indifference: In some cases, a school’s inaction or disregard for known hazing issues can rise to gross negligence.
  • Premises Liability: If hazing occurred on university property and the school failed to maintain a safe environment.
  • Breach of Contract: If the university failed to uphold its promised duties to students under enrollment agreements.
  • Title IX Violations: If gender-based hazing occurred and the university failed to respond appropriately.
• Third Parties: Other entities may also bear responsibility:
  • Landlords/Property Owners: If hazing occurred on rental property and the landlord knew or should have known about dangerous activities.
  • Bars or Alcohol Providers: Under “dram shop laws” in Texas, establishments that over-serve visibly intoxicated individuals who then cause harm can be held liable.
  • Security Companies / Event Organizers: If they failed in their duty to prevent harmful incidents at events they were hired to oversee.

Every case is unique, and the specific facts and circumstances will dictate which parties can be held liable. For Montague County families, this complex web of potential defendants underscores the importance of consulting with experienced legal counsel who understand the nuances of hazing litigation.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

While hazing incidents often feel localized and isolated, a critical legal strategy involves recognizing patterns that span across state lines and university campuses. These national hazing cases serve as anchor stories, illustrating the devastating commonalities in hazing rituals and the legal precedents established to hold individuals and institutions accountable. For Montague County families, understanding these patterns proves that individual chapters are rarely “rogue” and that national organizations often have a long history of failing to address similar, foreseeable dangers.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most frequent and tragic outcome of hazing is death by alcohol poisoning, directly linked to forced or coerced excessive drinking.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): In one of the most widely publicized hazing deaths, 19-year-old Timothy Piazza died after consuming dangerous amounts of alcohol during a “bid acceptance” event. Over a period of 12 hours, he fell multiple times, sustaining severe head injuries, all captured on the fraternity’s security cameras. Fraternity members delayed calling 911 for critical hours, fearing arrest or the chapter being shut down. This tragedy led to 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 landmark felony hazing statute. This case highlighted that extreme intoxication, deliberate delays in seeking medical attention, and a pervasive culture of silence are legally devastating and contribute directly to loss of life.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Just months after Piazza’s death, 20-year-old Andrew Coffey died from acute alcohol poisoning during an off-campus “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and forced to finish them. Multiple members faced criminal hazing charges, and Florida State temporarily suspended all Greek life and overhauled its policies. The Coffey case underscored that formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster, with fatal consequences often ignored by national organizations.
• Max Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died with a blood alcohol content of 0.495% after participating in a coercive “Bible study” drinking game. During the ritual, pledges were forced to consume alcohol rapidly whenever they answered questions incorrectly. His death directly inspired the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana, a felony hazing law, after criminal charges against several fraternity members, including a conviction for negligent homicide. This tragedy powerfully demonstrated that legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of systemic hazing practices.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): During a “Big/Little” pledge night, 20-year-old Stone Foltz was forced to consume an entire bottle of alcohol. He subsequently died from alcohol poisoning. This incident led to multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members involved in the hazing. In civil litigation, his family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, largely funded by the Pi Kappa Alpha national fraternity ($7 million) and Bowling Green State University ($3 million). The Foltz case is a stark reminder that both universities and national Greek organizations can face significant financial and reputational consequences when their failure to act allows hazing to flourish.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, hazing often involves extreme physical abuse and violent rituals, sometimes disguised as “tradition.”

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died after being subjected to a brutal blindfolded “glass ceiling” ritual at an off-campus fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. He was forced to wear a heavy backpack and was repeatedly tackled. He suffered a fatal traumatic brain injury, and fellow fraternity members significantly delayed seeking medical care. This case resulted in multiple convictions for individual members, and the national Pi Delta Psi fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, and was permanently banned from operating in Pennsylvania. This landmark case underlined that off-campus “retreats” are often deliberately chosen locations for intense hazing, and national organizations can be held criminally responsible for the actions of their chapters.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not exclusive to Greek life; it is a pervasive issue found across all types of student organizations, including high-profile athletic programs.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In a scandal that shook collegiate athletics, former football players alleged widespread sexualized, dehumanizing, and racist hazing within the Northwestern football program over multiple years. This led to multiple lawsuits against the university and coaching staff, the firing of head coach Pat Fitzgerald (who later confidentially settled a wrongful-termination lawsuit), and significant public scrutiny. This multi-faceted incident served as a powerful reminder that hazing extends far beyond Greek life, permeating big-money athletic programs where the culture of secrecy and “team loyalty” can protect systemic abuse.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national anchor stories, while geographically distant from Montague County, carry immense legal and practical significance for families facing hazing here in Texas. They reveal:

• Common Threads of Tragedy: The recurring elements are often the same: forced dangerous consumption of alcohol, physical violence or extreme exertion, humiliation, deliberate delays in seeking medical care, and systematic cover-ups.
• Precedent for Accountability: These cases have established patterns of liability for both individuals and powerful institutions, including national organizations and universities. The multi-million-dollar settlements and verdicts are not random; they are the result of legal strategies built on proving negligence, foreseeability, and institutional failures.
• Drivers of Legislative Change: Tragedies like those of Timothy Piazza and Max Gruver have directly led to stronger anti-hazing laws, creating better protections and more severe penalties. While Texas has its own hazing statutes, these national movements strengthen the overall legal landscape for victims.
• The Foreseeability Argument: When a specific hazing ritual (e.g., a “Big/Little” drinking night) that has killed students in other states is replicated by a Texas chapter, it significantly strengthens the argument that the national organization and potentially the university knew, or should have known, about the inherent dangers – the definition of foreseeability in legal terms.
• Montague County families facing hazing at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor are operating within a legal and cultural landscape profoundly shaped by these national lessons. These precedents are invaluable in our firm’s approach to holding responsible parties accountable and seeking justice for victims in Texas.

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

The allure of higher education often draws students from Montague County to Texas’s prominent universities. While these institutions offer incredible opportunities, they are not immune to the pervasive issue of hazing. For families in communities like Bowie, Nocona, and Saint Jo, knowing the distinct cultures, policies, and histories of hazing at these major Texas schools—and how incidents might uniquely affect your student—is critical.

While Montague County is not immediately adjacent to any of the five major universities we will discuss, its families regularly send students to each of them. We recognize that families in Montague County might choose universities based on specific programs, location, or cultural fit. Whether your child is venturing to a large public university or a private institution, the information below is tailored to help you understand the hazing landscape at these destination campuses.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

As one of Texas’s largest and most diverse urban universities, the University of Houston serves a vast student body, including many from communities like those in Montague County who seek a vibrant city environment. UH offers a dynamic campus experience, and its active Greek life, comprising fraternities, sororities, and various student organizations, plays a significant role in student engagement.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Houston, located in the heart of Houston, Texas, is a Tier One research institution that blends a traditional campus feel with the opportunities of a major metropolitan area. Its student body is a rich tapestry of commuter and residential students, contributing to a diverse and energetic atmosphere. Greek life is robust at UH, encompassing Panhellenic, Interfraternity, National Pan-Hellenic, and Multicultural Greek Councils, providing numerous social and leadership opportunities. Beyond Greek life, a myriad of student organizations, from cultural groups to sports clubs, shape the campus experience.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, clearly outlining its prohibition against hazing activities both on and off-campus. UH’s hazing policy, accessible through its official website, prohibits acts that endanger mental or physical health, including forced consumption of alcohol/food/drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and acts causing mental distress, when connected to initiation or membership.

Students and families at UH can report hazing through several channels:

• The Dean of Students Office
• The Division of Student Affairs & Enrollment Services
• UH’s online reporting forms, which may allow for anonymous submissions
• The University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) for criminal matters

UH typically publishes a statement on its commitment to hazing prevention and may include summaries of disciplinary actions taken against organizations in some public reports, though comprehensive lists of violations specific to hazing are not always as transparent as some other institutions.

5.1.3 Example Incident & Response

A notable incident contributing to lessons learned at the University of Houston involves Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) in 2016. Pledges of the fraternity allegedly experienced deprivation of sufficient food, water, and sleep during multi-day initiation events. Tragically, one student suffered a lacerated spleen after being violently slammed onto a table or similar surface. This severe injury brought to light the dangerous nature of some “initiation” rituals.

In response, the Pi Kappa Alpha chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was subsequently suspended by the university. While specific punitive details are not always fully public, subsequent UH disciplinary references against other fraternities have cited conduct deemed “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” often involving alcohol misuse and policy violations, which have led to suspensions or probationary periods. Such incidents underscore UH’s stated commitment to addressing hazing, though the ongoing challenge for all universities remains ensuring that policies are rigorously enforced and that transparency around violations is maintained.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a student from Montague County involved in a hazing incident at UH, the legal process can be complex. Investigations may involve multiple agencies, including the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) for on-campus incidents or criminal matters, and the Houston Police Department (HPD) for off-campus events within city limits. Civil lawsuits related to hazing at UH would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County, given the firm’s Houston office.

Potential defendants in a UH hazing case could include:

• Individual students directly involved.
• The local chapter of the fraternity or sorority.
• The national organization.
• Potentially, the University of Houston itself, depending on evidence of negligence or policy failures.
• Owners of off-campus properties where hazing occurred.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Montague County whose children attend or plan to attend UH should be acutely aware of hazing risks and proactive steps they can take:

• Understand UH’s Policies: Familiarize yourselves with the University of Houston’s anti-hazing policies and reporting procedures before your student enters an organization.
• Open Communication: Maintain open, non-judgmental communication with your student about their experiences, especially during new member periods. Ask direct questions about activities, comfort levels, and any pressure they might feel.
• Document Everything: If you suspect hazing, immediately document all details, including dates, times, locations, individuals involved, and specific acts. Photograph any injuries and preserve all digital communications (texts, DMs, group chats).
• Prioritize Safety First: If your student is in immediate danger or requires medical attention, call 911 or UHPD without hesitation. Medical amnesty policies often apply in such situations, protecting the student from minor violations in exchange for seeking help.
• Report Internally & Externally: Consider reporting to UH’s Dean of Students or Student Conduct office. For criminal acts, a report to UHPD or HPD is crucial.
• Seek Legal Counsel Promptly: If significant harm has occurred or if you believe the university’s response is inadequate, contact a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases. Our firm has deep roots in Houston and understands the local legal landscape, including how to navigate investigations with UH, HPD, and Harris County courts. Such counsel can help preserve evidence and develop a comprehensive strategy.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a cornerstone institution with deeply ingrained traditions and a strong sense of community, attracts countless students, including many from Montague County, who are drawn to its unique spirit, academic rigor, and the prestigious Corps of Cadets. However, even within such a proud and tradition-rich environment, hazing remains a serious concern that impacts both Greek life and other student organizations.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Nestled in College Station, Texas A&M is renowned for its traditions, loyal Aggie Network, and a strong military heritage epitomized by the Corps of Cadets. The university fosters a distinct culture of leadership, service, and a collective identity. Greek life is active, with diverse fraternities and sororities, and thousands of student organizations further enrich the campus experience. The Corps of Cadets, a significant part of A&M’s identity, maintains a rigorous, structured, and often hierarchical environment.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M unequivocally prohibits hazing in all its forms. Its policies align with Texas law, defining hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation or membership. The university emphasizes that consent is not a defense to hazing.

Texas A&M provides various avenues for reporting hazing incidents:

• The Department of Student Life (Student Conduct Office)
• Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD)
• Confidential reporting through the university’s “Tell Us” website or hotline
• Specific reporting channels within the Corps of Cadets
• The university regularly publishes its hazing policies and provides statements on its prevention efforts.

5.2.3 Example Incidents & Responses

Despite strict policies, Texas A&M has faced significant hazing allegations:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (2021): Perhaps one of the most disturbing recent incidents involved the Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) fraternity, where two pledges alleged an extreme hazing ritual. They claimed they were forced into strenuous physical activity, then had corrosive substances poured on them, including an industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in severe chemical burns requiring emergency skin graft surgeries. The pledges subsequently filed a $1 million lawsuit against the fraternity, and SAE was suspended by the university for two years. This case highlights the dangerous escalation of physical hazing and the use of harmful chemicals.
• Corps of Cadets (2023): A lawsuit filed in 2023 alleged degrading and traumatizing hazing within the Corps of Cadets. A cadet claimed he was subjected to simulated sexual acts and was physically bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million, alleging violations of university anti-hazing policies. Texas A&M issued a statement confirming it takes hazing seriously and handles such matters under its rules, though the specific disciplinary outcomes were not fully public.
• Kappa Sigma (2023): Ongoing litigation points to allegations of severe physical hazing resulting in injuries consistent with rhabdomyolysis (a severe muscle breakdown from extreme physical exertion) at a Kappa Sigma chapter. This case underscores the potential for extreme workouts disguised as “training” to cause life-threatening health issues.

These incidents demonstrate that hazing at Texas A&M impacts both traditional Greek life and the revered Corps of Cadets, posing distinct challenges given the different subcultures and oversight structures.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For families in Montague County, a hazing incident involving a Texas A&M student could involve investigations by the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) and potentially the College Station Police Department for off-campus incidents. Civil suits would typically be filed in Brazos County courts or, depending on the severity and national scope, potentially federal court.

Potential defendants often include individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, the specific unit within the Corps of Cadets if applicable, and potentially the university itself, particularly if there is evidence of systemic failures or ignored warnings.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Montague County with students at Texas A&M need to be particularly vigilant:

• Discuss Traditions Safely: Engage in conversations about A&M traditions, distinguishing between respectful rituals and those that cross into hazing. Emphasize that loyalty should never come at the cost of safety or dignity.
• Monitor Physical Changes: Be alert to signs of extreme fatigue, unexplained injuries, or sudden emotional withdrawal, particularly if your student is involved in Greek life or the Corps. The intense nature of some Corps activities can sometimes mask hazing as “training.”
• Preserve Digital Evidence: Group chats are critical. If your student is in Greek life or the Corps, instruct them to screenshot, record, and save all potentially relevant messages, photos, and videos. These pieces of evidence are often deleted quickly by perpetrators.
• Report Internally & Externally: Consider reporting to Texas A&M’s Student Conduct Office or the Corps leadership. For criminal acts, contacting Texas A&M UPD or College Station PD is essential. The “Tell Us” hotline provides a discreet option.
• Consult Legal Counsel Early: Given A&M’s complex institutional structure and the deeply ingrained nature of some traditions, obtaining legal guidance from a firm experienced in Texas A&M hazing cases is highly advisable. Our firm understands the intricacies of navigating both Greek life and Corps-related hazing investigations and litigation.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin stands as a beacon of academic excellence and cultural vibrancy in Central Texas, attracting a diverse student population, including students from Montague County. Its sprawling campus and active student life, particularly its expansive Greek system and various spirit organizations, make it a focal point for both innovative education and, unfortunately, occasional hazing incidents.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The flagship institution of the University of Texas System, UT Austin defines the landscape of Central Texas. It’s a vibrant, large public university known for its robust academics, fierce school spirit (Go Longhorns!), and a highly active Greek community. Numerous fraternities, sororities, and student organizations—including spirit groups, athletic clubs, and cultural associations—contribute to a dynamic campus environment, but also present myriad contexts where hazing can unfortunately occur.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas at Austin maintains one of the most transparent and vigorously enforced anti-hazing policies among Texas universities. UT’s policy strictly prohibits hazing, adhering to Texas law that defines and criminalizes acts that endanger mental or physical health for initiation into an organization. This policy applies to all registered student organizations, both on and off-campus.

UT Austin is notable for its publicly accessible Hazing Violations page on the Dean of Students website (deanofstudents.utexas.edu/sfl/hazingreports.php). This online log details:

• The names of organizations found responsible for hazing.
• The dates of the violations.
• A description of the conduct.
• The sanctions imposed by the university.

Reporting channels at UT include:

• The Dean of Students Office
• The Office of Student Conduct
• The University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) for criminal matters
• Confidential online reporting forms

5.3.3 Example Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s proactive public reporting provides clear examples of past hazing incidents:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): This fraternity was sanctioned after new members were directed to consume milk and participate in strenuous calisthenics—activities widely recognized as classic physical and psychological hazing tactics. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education. This incident, openly published by UT, underscores the ongoing nature of such activities.
• Texas Wranglers (Spirit Organization): Historically, groups like the Texas Wranglers (a well-known spirit group, similar to the now-disbanded Texas Cowboys) have faced disciplinary action for hazing that included forced workouts, alcohol-related misconduct, and physically or mentally punitive practices. These incidents illustrate that hazing extends beyond Greek life to other highly visible and tradition-bound student organizations.

The extensive list of past violations on UT’s website serves as a crucial resource for families and can provide powerful pattern evidence in any civil litigation, demonstrating the university’s prior knowledge of an organization’s behaviors.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a student from Montague County involved in a hazing incident at UT, investigations may be conducted by the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) for on-campus incidents, or the Austin Police Department (APD) for off-campus events within Austin city limits. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in Travis County, where Austin is located, or potentially in federal court.

Due to UT’s detailed public records, a civil case against individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially the university itself can be bolstered by easily accessible information on prior violations. These records can demonstrate a pattern of similar conduct and the university’s awareness of that pattern.

5.3.5 What UT Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Montague County whose children attend UT Austin should utilize the university’s transparency to their advantage and take proactive steps:

• Review UT’s Hazing Log: Before your student joins any organization, review UT Austin’s publicly available Hazing Violations page. Understand the history of any groups they are considering.
• Discuss the “Tradition Trap”: UT’s culture is rich in traditions, but differentiate between positive traditions and those that are harmful. Help your student recognize when an activity crosses a line from spirited fun into hazing.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: As with all hazing incidents, immediate and meticulous documentation of physical injuries, digital communications (group chats, DMs), and witness statements is crucial.
• Report Aggressively: UT’s robust reporting system offers multiple avenues, including anonymous options. For criminal acts, UTPD or APD should be contacted. The public nature of UT’s disciplinary actions means that reporting has a greater chance of leading to visible accountability.
• Seek Experienced Legal Counsel: If a hazing incident has harmed your student, contacting a lawyer experienced in UT Austin hazing cases is vital. Our firm understands how to leverage UT’s published disciplinary records as compelling evidence in civil lawsuits and to navigate the complexities of litigation in Travis County.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, nestled in the upscale Dallas suburb of University Park, is a private institution renowned for its strong Greek life and vibrant social scene. Students from Montague County may choose SMU for its academic prestige, smaller class sizes, and metropolitan Dallas location. However, even in this privileged environment, hazing remains a persistent concern.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is a private, liberal arts university known for its beautiful campus, strong academic programs, and a robust social calendar largely driven by its Greek system. It cultivates a tight-knit community feel, but also a competitive social environment. Given its location in Dallas, students have access to vast cultural and professional opportunities. The fraternities and sororities at SMU, encompassing Panhellenic, IFC, NPHC, and Multicultural Greek organizations, are prominent and highly influential in student life.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU maintains clear anti-hazing policies that prohibit any act against a student for purposes of initiation or affiliation that causes or is reasonably likely to cause physical injury or mental distress. As a private institution, SMU’s policies are often less publicly accessible than those of state universities, but the university is committed to enforcing them.

SMU provides the following reporting channels:

• Dean of Students Office
• Office of Student Conduct
• SMU Police Department (SMU PD)
• Anonymous reporting systems, such as “Real Response,” which allow students to report concerns via an app or web form.

SMU emphasizes prevention through educational programs and aims to foster a safe campus environment, although the extent of public disclosure regarding specific violations may vary compared to public institutions.

5.4.3 Example Incidents & Responses

Like many universities with significant Greek life, SMU has faced hazing incidents:

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): This fraternity chapter was suspended after reports emerged of new members being subjected to excessive alcohol consumption, physical paddling, and sleep deprivation. The university placed the chapter under significant restrictions, including a ban on recruiting new members for an extended period. This incident highlighted that even at private universities, “traditions” can devolve into illegal and dangerous hazing, leading to severe institutional consequences.
• SMU’s history, while less publicly detailed than some state schools, includes various other instances where fraternities and sororities have faced internal disciplinary actions or suspensions due to allegations of hazing-related misconduct, often involving alcohol, physical activities, or psychological pressure.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a student from Montague County involved in a hazing incident at SMU, investigations might be handled by the SMU Police Department (SMU PD) for campus-based incidents or external police forces (e.g., University Park Police, Dallas Police) for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits against SMU, its organizations, or individuals would typically be filed in Dallas County courts or potentially federal court.

As a private university, SMU does not have the same public records requirements as state institutions. However, during civil discovery, a seasoned legal team can compel the production of internal university and fraternity/sorority records, including past disciplinary actions, internal investigation reports, and communications that shed light on a pattern of hazing.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Montague County whose children attend SMU should be particularly attentive:

• Understand the Social Landscape: At SMU, Greek life plays a significant role. Discuss with your student the pressures to conform and the importance of prioritizing safety over social acceptance.
• Leverage Anonymous Reporting: SMU’s anonymous reporting systems, like “Real Response,” can be a vital tool for students who fear direct retaliation but wish to report concerning activities.
• Document and Record: Given the potentially less public nature of SMU’s internal disciplinary records, students and parents must be diligent in preserving all personal evidence: screenshots of digital communications, photos of injuries, and detailed notes of incidents.
• Report Criminal Acts to Police: For severe hazing involving physical assault, sexual abuse, or forced substance use, contacting SMU PD or local police is imperative.
• Seek Legal Expertise: If your student has been harmed, contacting a lawyer experienced in SMU hazing cases is crucial. Our firm understands the distinctions of litigation against private institutions and how to effectively conduct discovery to uncover crucial evidence of institutional knowledge or oversight failures in Dallas County.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Baptist university in Waco, Texas, is known for its strong academic programs, faith-based mission, and vibrant campus community. Students from Montague County are often drawn to Baylor’s unique blend of spiritual and intellectual development. However, Baylor, like other major universities, has not been immune to challenges involving student conduct, including hazing, amidst its commitment to a values-driven environment.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Set in Waco, Baylor University is Texas’s oldest continuously operating university, deeply rooted in its Christian identity. It offers a rich array of academic and extracurricular opportunities within a strong community framework. Baylor has a highly engaged Greek system (Panhellenic, IFC, NPHC, and Multicultural organizations), athletic programs that compete at the highest levels, and numerous spirit and student-led groups. The university’s emphasis on character formation and community sets a specific cultural context for all student activities.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing, articulating policies that align with Texas state law and its own commitment to student well-being. Its policy defines hazing as any act that causes or is reasonably likely to cause physical harm or mental suffering during any process in which persons become members of an organization. Baylor’s policies make it clear that consent to hazing is not a valid defense.

Reporting channels at Baylor typically include:

• The Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) for criminal matters.
• The Office of Student Conduct.
• Specific offices like Student Activities, which oversees Greek life.
• Anonymous reporting options often available through the university website.

The university regularly publishes its anti-hazing stance and may provide general information about enforcement, though detailed public logs of violations (like UT’s) are not typical for private institutions.

5.5.3 Example Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history, while primarily recognized for its academic and athletic achievements, has included episodes of hazing that underscore ongoing vigilance:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): A significant incident involved the Baylor baseball team, where a hazing investigation led to the suspension of 14 players. The suspensions were staggered to allow the team to compete but still served as a public acknowledgment of misconduct within a high-profile athletic program. This case, coming after the university’s broader Title IX scandal, brought renewed scrutiny to institutional oversight across all student groups, not just Greek life.
• While specific Greek hazing incidents are often handled internally, Baylor’s policies and statements indicate ongoing efforts to address violations within fraternities and sororities, reaffirming its commitment to a safe campus environment following its past widely publicized challenges with student safety and institutional accountability.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a student from Montague County involved in a hazing incident at Baylor, investigations would primarily fall under the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) for on-campus events or the Waco Police Department for off-campus incidents. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in McLennan County, where Waco is located, or potentially in federal court.

As with other private institutions, securing detailed records of past violations or internal investigations from Baylor and its student organizations would typically require the formal discovery process within a civil lawsuit. This process, led by experienced legal counsel, compels the production of internal documents that might not otherwise be publicly available.

5.1.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Montague County whose children attend Baylor University should consider the following:

• Reinforce Values-Alignment: Discuss with your student how participation in any organization, Greek or otherwise, should align with Baylor’s and your family’s core values. Hazing fundamentally conflicts with those values.
• Be Mindful of Athletics: If your student is involved in sports, be particularly aware of the potential for hazing, which can often be mislabeled as “team bonding” or “toughening up.”
• Prioritize Confidential Reporting: For students who are reluctant to report openly, Baylor’s anonymous reporting options are vital. Emphasize that reporting concerns is an act of courage and kindness, not disloyalty.
• Document Everything Diligently: As a private institution, Baylor’s information on past incidents may not be publicly listed. Therefore, detailed personal documentation—screenshots of digital communications, notes on incidents, and photographs of injuries—is exceptionally important.
• Contact a Hazing Lawyer: If your student has been harmed, contacting a lawyer experienced in Baylor hazing cases is strongly advised. Our firm understands the intricacies of navigating claims against private universities and effectively uses civil discovery to uncover the truth and seek accountability in McLennan County courts.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For families in Montague County, it’s critical to understand that many of the fraternities and sororities your children encounter at Texas universities are not standalone campus groups. They are local chapters of powerful national organizations. These national entities, with their vast networks and decades of history, play a central role in both the problem of hazing and the pathway to accountability.

Why National Histories Matter

Many fraternities and sororities found at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor—including well-known organizations like Pi Kappa Alpha, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, or Kappa Alpha Order—are part of larger, national (and sometimes international) organizations. These national headquarters often:

• Maintain extensive anti-hazing policies and risk management manuals. These documents exist not just because hazing is illegal, but because the national organizations have, tragically, seen numerous deaths and catastrophic injuries across their chapters over decades.
• Are aware of common hazing patterns within their own organizations and others in the Greek system: forced drinking nights, “Big/Little” rituals that escalate, physical abuse as a test of loyalty, and humiliating initiations.

This extensive history is not just background information; it forms a critical component of legal strategy. When a Texas chapter—whether at UTSA or any other Texas campus—repeats the same dangerous script that has caused injury or death at another chapter in a different state, it significantly strengthens the argument of foreseeability. This means the national organization knew or should have known such an event was likely to occur again, given its past history, thereby supporting strong negligence or even punitive damages arguments against the national entity.

Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

While it’s impossible to list every single chapter at every Texas university, it’s essential to recognize that many national organizations have recurring hazing patterns. Here, we synthesize some of the major fraternities and sororities present at these Texas universities and highlight their national hazing histories.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor.
  • Notable National Incidents: The tragic Stone Foltz death at Bowling Green State University (2021) after coerced alcohol consumption led to a $10 million settlement from the national fraternity and university. David Bogenberger’s death at Northern Illinois University (2012) also from alcohol poisoning led to a $14 million settlement. These cases demonstrate a clear national pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU.
  • Notable National Incidents: SAE has a deeply concerning national history with multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries nationwide. This includes a traumatic brain injury lawsuit at the University of Alabama (filed 2023) and past chemical burns at Texas A&M (2021) involving industrial cleaner, and allegations of assault at UT Austin (2024). SAE notably attempted to eliminate traditional pledging in 2014 in response to its history, but hazing sadly persists.
• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor.
  • Notable National Incidents: Max Gruver’s death at Louisiana State University (2017) after a fatal alcohol hazing game (“Bible study”) led to criminal convictions and the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing law. This highlights a clear national pattern often involving lethal alcohol consumption.
• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT.
  • Notable National Incidents: Andrew Coffey’s death at Florida State University (2017) from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. This case illustrates a national pattern of forced excessive drinking through ritualized events.
• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor.
  • Notable National Incidents: Timothy Piazza’s death at Penn State University (2017) from a fall after extreme alcohol consumption and delayed medical treatment, which led to the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. This case underscores a national pattern of cover-ups and a disregard for life-threatening student health.
• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI): Present at Texas A&M.
  • Notable National Incidents: Danny Santulli’s catastrophic brain injury at the University of Missouri (2021) from forced alcohol consumption during a “pledge dad reveal” night led to multi-million dollar confidential settlements with over 20 defendants. This case represents a national pattern of severe, life-altering injuries from extreme alcohol hazing.
• Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor.
  • Notable National Incidents: Allegations like Rafeal Joseph’s severe beatings at the University of Southern Mississippi (2023) highlight a national pattern of physical hazing, including traditional paddling, within some NPHC fraternities, despite national policies prohibiting it.
• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, Baylor.
  • Notable National Incidents: Chad Meredith’s drowning death at the University of Miami (2001) after being pressured to swim across a lake while intoxicated led to a $12.6 million jury verdict. This case set a precedent for liability in alcohol-fueled, dangerous “initiation” activities.
• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor.
  • Notable National Incidents: A recent College of Charleston case (2024) resulted in a $10 million+ settlement for a pledge who suffered physical beatings, forced drug/alcohol consumption, and psychological torment. This underscores that juries will award substantial damages for severe hazing, including emotional and physical harm.

This list is not exhaustive, but these examples illustrate that hazardous hazing patterns are a recurring issue across multiple national organizations.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

For families in Montague County considering legal action, these national histories are not just cautionary tales; they are powerful legal tools.

• Foreseeability: When a national organization has been sued, settled, or faced criminal charges multiple times for hazing incidents—especially those involving specific rituals or extreme alcohol consumption—it becomes exceptionally difficult for them to argue that a similar incident at a Texas chapter was “unforeseeable.” They had ample prior notice of the dangers.
• Institutional Negligence: These patterns can demonstrate that national organizations failed to:
  • Adequately train their local chapters.
  • Effectively monitor their chapters for compliance with anti-hazing policies.
  • Discipline chapters or individuals severely enough to deter future misconduct.
  • Respond meaningfully to prior warnings or incidents.
• Insurance Coverage: Evidence of a national pattern of hazing can be critical in overcoming insurance companies’ claims that hazing is an “intentional act” not covered by policies. Our firm can argue that the national organization’s negligent failure to prevent foreseeable hazing events (despite knowledge of past incidents) is a covered act of negligence, ensuring compensation for victims.
• Punitive Damages: In cases where a national organization has a clear history of ignoring repeated warnings or engaging in egregious conduct, these patterns can support claims for punitive damages, which are designed to punish the defendant and deter similar behavior in the future.

Ultimately, the national history of hazing within these powerful organizations underscores the complexity and high stakes of such litigation. For Montague County families, this means having a legal team that not only understands Texas law but also possesses the investigative depth to connect local incidents to broader national patterns—a strategy crucial for holding every responsible party accountable.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

When a student from Montague County experiences hazing, the path to justice and accountability can seem overwhelming. Building a strong legal case requires meticulous evidence collection, an understanding of compensable damages, and a sophisticated legal strategy capable of countering powerful institutional defenses. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, we specialize in these complex investigations, understanding that evidence disappears quickly and that a proactive approach is paramount.

Evidence: The Cornerstones of a Hazing Case

Modern hazing cases are often won or lost based on the quality and quantity of evidence. The days of solely relying on witness statements are largely over; digital evidence is now paramount.

• Digital Communications: These are often the most critical pieces of evidence. Group chats on platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Snapchat, or even fraternity-specific apps can reveal planning, intent, coercion, and real-time events. This evidence documents who was involved, what was said, and when. Even “disappearing” messages on Snapchat or Instagram’s vanish mode must be screenshot and preserved immediately, as digital forensics can often recover deleted data. 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.
• Photos & Videos: Perpetrators often capture hazing on their own devices. This includes photos or videos showing hazing events, injuries, humiliating acts, forced drinking, or coercion. Surveillance footage from campus security cameras, bar cameras, or even Ring/doorbell cameras at off-campus houses can also be key. Any such media, whether posted on social media or shared in private group chats, must be secured.
• Internal Organization Documents: Subpoenas can compel the production of records from local chapters and national organizations. This includes pledge manuals, initiation scripts, “traditions” lists, and internal communications (emails, texts) between officers about new members. National policies and training materials, especially those outlining anti-hazing directives, are also crucial for showing what the organization knew it should be doing.
• University Records: Through discovery in a lawsuit, we can obtain the university’s internal records. This often includes prior conduct files, records of probation or suspensions against the specific organization, warning letters, and incident reports to campus police or student conduct offices. These documents are vital for establishing a pattern of negligence or the university’s prior knowledge of an organization’s hazing history.
• Medical and Psychological Records: This evidence objectively documents the harm suffered. It includes emergency room reports, ambulance records, hospitalization notes, toxicology reports, and any imaging (X-rays, CT scans) related to injuries. Crucially, psychological evaluations documenting PTSD, depression, anxiety, or other mental health impacts are essential for proving non-economic damages. When seeking medical care, it is vital to clearly state that injuries are related to hazing so it is documented in the medical record.
• Witness Testimony: In addition to the victim’s account, testimony from other pledges, current or former members, roommates, Resident Advisors (RAs), or other bystanders can corroborate events and fill in missing details. Former members who have left the organization, especially due to hazing concerns, often provide critical insights and honest accounts.

Damages: What Families Can Recover

When hazing causes injury or death, victims and their families can pursue compensation for a wide range of damages. These typically fall into two categories:

Economic Damages (Quantifiable Financial Losses):

• Medical Expenses: This covers all costs incurred for treatment, including ambulance transport, emergency room visits, hospitalization (including ICU or surgery), ongoing physical and occupational therapy, medications, and medical equipment. For catastrophic injuries, a life care plan may be developed to project future medical costs over the victim’s lifetime (as seen in cases like Danny Santulli’s brain injury).
• Lost Income & Earning Capacity: This includes wages lost if the victim or a parent had to take time off work. It also considers
  • Lost Educational Opportunities: Tuition or fees for missed semesters, loss of scholarships, and the financial impact of delayed graduation.
  • Diminished Future Earning Capacity: If injuries (e.g., traumatic brain injury, severe psychological trauma) result in a permanent disability impacting the victim’s ability to work, expert economists can calculate the lifetime loss of potential income.
• Other Economic Losses: This can include property damage (e.g., destroyed personal items during hazing), or the costs associated with transferring to a different school if the trauma makes returning impossible.

Non-Economic Damages (Subjective, Legally Compensable Harm):

• Physical Pain & Suffering: Compensation for the actual physical pain from injuries, ongoing discomfort, and the long-term impact of permanent injuries or chronic pain.
• Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: This covers conditions like Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), major depression, severe anxiety, panic attacks, and suicidal ideation resulting from the hazing. Documentation from mental health professionals is crucial for proving these significant, yet invisible, injuries. The extreme humiliation, shame, loss of dignity, and fear experienced are also part of this claim.
• Loss of Enjoyment of Life: This compensates for the inability to participate in activities the victim once loved (sports, hobbies, social life), withdrawal from the normal college experience, and the overall deterioration of their quality of life.
• Reputational Harm: If the hazing incident or its aftermath negatively impacted the victim’s reputation, affecting future educational or employment prospects, this can also be part of the claim.

Wrongful Death Damages (For Families):

When hazing tragically results in death, surviving family members (typically parents, children, and spouses in Texas) can seek:

• Funeral and Burial Costs: Direct expenses related to the deceased.
• Loss of Financial Support: If the deceased would have contributed financially to the family (e.g., support for parents in old age), these projected losses can be recovered.
• Loss of Companionship, Love, and Society: This is compensation for the profound emotional void left by the loss of a loved one, including lost guidance, comfort, and care.
• Grief and Emotional Suffering: The deep emotional distress experienced by family members due to the traumatic loss.

Punitive Damages:

In certain egregious cases, courts may award punitive damages. These are not designed to compensate the victim but to punish particularly reckless, malicious, or grossly negligent defendants and deter similar conduct in the future. They are often sought when defendants (especially organizations or institutions) had prior warnings, showed callous indifference to known risks, or tried to cover up the hazing. While Texas law places caps on punitive damages in many instances, they remain a powerful tool for accountability.

Strategy: Overcoming Institutional Defenses

Building a successful hazing case means anticipating and dismantling the common defenses employed by national fraternities, universities, and their insurance companies. Our firm, The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, leverages our deep experience to overcome these tactics:

1. “The Pledge Consented / It Was Voluntary”: We counter this by invoking Texas Education Code § 37.155, which explicitly states consent is not a defense to hazing. We present expert testimony on power dynamics, peer pressure, and the psychological coercion inherent in hazing to show that “consent” is not freely given.
2. “This Was a Rogue Chapter / National Didn’t Know”: We conduct exhaustive discovery to unearth national records of prior hazing incidents at other chapters. Such pattern evidence demonstrates that the national HQ had “constructive notice” of the dangers and failed in its duty to supervise or enforce policies. This strategy was crucial in cases like Pi Kappa Alpha where national orgs were held liable for chapters repeating alcohol hazing.
3. “It Happened Off-Campus / Not Our Property”: This defense is frequently used. However, we argue that if the organization is university-recognized, receives dues from nationals, or there is a known pattern of off-campus hazing, both the university and the national organization can still be liable based on their sponsorship, control, or knowledge. The Pi Delta Psi retreat death (Deng case) is a prime example of off-campus liability for a national organization.
4. “We Have Strict Anti-Hazing Policies — This Violated Our Rules”: We expose the gap between “paper policies” and actual enforcement. We look for evidence of prior minimal punishments, perfunctory training, or a history where policies were ignored, demonstrating negligent supervision.
5. “This Was an Unforeseeable Accident”: This is rebutted by linking the specific incident to the documented national hazing patterns (as described in section 6) and expert testimony. Alcohol poisoning, physical injuries from extreme exercise, or humiliation are all foreseeable risks of hazing, especially given decades of tragic incidents.
6. “The University Has Sovereign Immunity” (Public Schools): While public universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT enjoy some sovereign immunity, we explore exceptions such as gross negligence, willful misconduct, or Title IX violations. Even with immunity, exposing systemic failures often leads to settlements to avoid public scrutiny and negative publicity.
7. “Insurance Doesn’t Cover Hazing / Intentional Acts”: Our experience as “Legal Emergency Lawyers” allows us to navigate complex insurance battles. We argue that even if hazing was intentional, the national or university’s negligent failure to supervise or prevent foreseeable hazing falls under coverage. We identify all potential policies, including homeowner’s policies of individual members, local chapter policies, national policies, and university umbrella policies, to maximize available compensation. Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) is particularly crucial here, as she intimately understands how large insurance companies value claims, negotiate, and defend against them.

This strategic approach, combined with diligent evidence collection and a deep understanding of hazing psychology and liability, allows our firm to build powerful cases for Montague County families and victims across Texas, seeking not just compensation, but genuine accountability.

Practical Guides & FAQs

For parents, students, and witnesses in Montague County, navigating the aftermath of hazing can be confusing and emotionally taxing. Knowing what steps to take, what questions to ask, and what pitfalls to avoid is crucial for ensuring safety and preserving legal options. Here, we offer practical guides and address common questions.

8.1 For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

Parents are often the first line of defense. Trust your instincts, and look for these warning signs:

• Warning Signs of Hazing:
  • Unexplained Injuries: Bruises, burns, cuts, or repeated “accidents” that don’t add up.
  • Physical Exhaustion: Extreme fatigue, sleep deprivation, or falling asleep constantly.
  • Mood Changes: Drastic shifts in personality, increased anxiety, depression, irritability, or unusual withdrawal from family and friends.
  • Secrecy: Your child becomes unusually secretive about organizational activities, saying things like, “I can’t talk about it,” or “It’s a secret.”
  • Constant Digital Presence: Obsessive monitoring of their phone for group chats, fear of missing “mandatory” events or calls at odd hours.
  • Academic Decline: Sudden drop in grades, missing classes, or neglecting assignments due to organizational commitments.
  • Financial Demands: Unexpected requests for money for “fines,” excessive dues, or purchasing items for older members.
  • Weight Changes: Sudden, unexplained weight loss (from food/sleep deprivation) or gain.
• How to Talk to Your Child:
  • Approach them with empathy, not judgment. Start with open-ended questions like, “How are things going with [Organization Name]? Are you enjoying it?”
  • Emphasize their safety and well-being over loyalty or status. Reassure them that you will support them regardless of their choices.
  • Ask direct but non-accusatory questions: “Do you feel pressured to do anything you’re uncomfortable with?” or “Is anyone asking you to keep secrets?”
• If Your Child is Hurt:
  • Prioritize Medical Care: Get them immediate medical attention, even if they claim they’re “fine.” Their health comes first.
  • Document Everything: Photograph all injuries, saving digital copies with timestamps. Write down everything your child tells you about the incident, including names, dates, times, and specific actions.
  • Preserve Evidence: Secure all digital communications (group chats, texts, DMs) by screenshotting and backing them up.
• Dealing with the University:
  • Document every communication you have with university administrators, including dates, names, and what was discussed.
  • Ask specific questions about prior incidents involving the same organization and what actions the school took. This helps to establish a pattern of institutional knowledge.
• When to Talk to a Lawyer:
  • If your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm, or if you believe the university or organization is minimizing the incident or attempting a cover-up. Our firm can help you understand the next steps.

8.2 For Students / Pledges

We speak directly to students from Montague County attending Texas universities: you have rights, and your safety is paramount.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition?
  • If you feel unsafe, humiliated, coerced, or forced to drink and endure pain, or if activities are hidden from the public or administrators – it probably is hazing. True bonding does not require secrecy, humiliation, or danger.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story:
  • You might feel like you “agreed” to certain activities to join your group. However, the law recognizes power dynamics, fear of exclusion, and immense peer pressure as factors that negate true voluntary consent. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely:
  • You have the legal right to leave any organization at any time. If you feel unsafe, remove yourself immediately and reach out to a trusted adult, campus official, or our firm.
  • Many campuses and state laws offer good-faith reporting and medical amnesty protections. This means if you need to call for help in an emergency, you often will not be penalized for minor violations (e.g., underage drinking).
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Many schools and laws, including Texas, encourage calling for help by offering legal protections for those who seek aid in an emergency, even if they were also involved in illegal activities like underage drinking. Your safety, and the safety of others, comes first.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were a part of a hazing incident, whether as a participant or a witness, you might carry a significant burden of guilt or fear. We want you to know:

• Your Testimony Matters: Your decision to come forward can be instrumental in preventing future harm and saving lives. Your evidence can provide crucial details that victims might not have.
• Seek Legal Counsel: If you have concerns about your own legal exposure, it is advisable to consult with an attorney confidentially. Our firm, with its dual expertise in personal injury and criminal defense (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/), can provide guidance on your rights and how your testimony might impact criminal or civil proceedings.
• Cooperation for Accountability: While challenging, cooperating with investigations can be a powerful step toward accountability for the victims and fundamental change within the organization.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For Montague County families, the shock and confusion surrounding a hazing incident can lead to grave errors that undermine a potential legal case. Avoid these common pitfalls:

1. Letting your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence:
   • What parents think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble, so let’s delete incriminating messages.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This can appear as evidence tampering, can be considered obstruction of justice, and makes proving your child’s case nearly impossible. Digital forensics can often recover deleted messages, but original screenshots are always preferred.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing content. Back up group chats, texts, photos, and videos to a secure cloud server or email them to yourself.
2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly:
   • What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind for what they did to my child.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Direct confrontation will immediately put the organization on high alert. They will likely lawyer up, begin destroying evidence, coach witnesses on what to say, and prepare their defenses.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in detail, then call a lawyer before any direct communication.
3. Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms:
   • What universities do: Universities often pressure families to sign waivers, non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), or agreements for an “internal resolution.”
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your child’s right to pursue legal action. Internal settlements are frequently far below the true value of the case and often protect the institution more than the victim.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or any organization without having an experienced 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, who will screenshot everything. Inconsistencies between public posts and later legal statements can severely hurt credibility. Additionally, it can inadvertently waive certain legal protections.
   • What to do instead: Document privately. Share only with trusted legal counsel. Your lawyer can advise on appropriate public communication strategies.
5. Letting your child go back to a “one last meeting” with the organization:
   • What fraternities say: “Just come talk to us before you do anything drastic; we want to make amends.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Organizations often use these meetings to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements from the victim that can be used against them in a legal context.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication from the organization should be directed to your attorney.
6. Waiting “to see how the university handles it”:
   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating; let us handle this internally to avoid public scrutiny.”
   • Why it’s wrong: While universities conduct internal investigations, evidence disappears rapidly, witnesses graduate, and the statute of limitations (generally 2 years from injury/death in Texas) continues to run. The university’s process is designed to handle campus discipline, not necessarily to secure full legal accountability or compensation for your child.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW and consult a lawyer immediately. University processes are separate from potential civil lawsuits.
7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer:
   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim quickly.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Insurance adjusters represent the insurance company’s interests, not yours. Recorded statements can be used against you, and they often offer lowball settlements early in the process before the full extent of damages is known.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and inform them that your attorney will contact them directly.

For more insights into these critical errors, watch Attorney911’s video on client mistakes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY.

8.5 Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  • Yes, under specific circumstances. Public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, UT) are often protected by sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, or Title IX violations. Private universities (SMU, Baylor) have fewer immunity protections. Each case depends on its unique facts. Contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.
• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  • Hazing can be a felony. While it starts as a Class B misdemeanor, it becomes a state jail felony in Texas if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals, including organization officers, can also face charges for failing to report hazing.
• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
  • Yes, absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts recognize that “consent” given under peer pressure, power imbalance, or fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent.
• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  • Generally, the statute of limitations in Texas is 2 years from the date of injury or death. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this period if the harm or its cause was not immediately apparent. In cases involving cover-ups or fraud, the statute may be tolled (paused). Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses forget, and organizations destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to discuss your specific timeline. You can learn more about the statute of limitations in our video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c.
• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  • The location of hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and foreseeability of such events. Many major hazing cases (e.g., Pi Delta Psi’s retreat hazing, Sigma Pi’s unofficial house hazing) 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 going to trial. Our firm can work to request sealed court records and confidential settlement terms to protect your family’s privacy while still pursuing full accountability.
• “How do contingency fees work for hazing cases?”
  • A contingency fee means you pay no upfront legal fees. Our firm’s payment is contingent on the successful resolution of your case, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win. This allows families in Montague County, regardless of their financial situation, to pursue justice. You can learn more about contingency fees in our video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc.

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—and how to win anyway. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911 and the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, we bring a unique blend of strategic insight, aggressive litigation experience, and profound empathy to every case, fighting for families across Texas, including those in Montague County.

Our firm’s strength in hazing litigation stems from distinct qualifications:

• Insurance Insider Advantage (Lupe Peña): Our Associate Attorney Lupe Peña is a former insurance defense attorney for a national firm. This experience means she knows precisely how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims. She understands their delay tactics, coverage exclusion arguments, and strategies for avoiding payouts. Simply put, we know their playbook because we used to run it, and we use that knowledge to your advantage. Her complete profile is available at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions (Ralph Manginello): Managing Partner Ralph Manginello has a proven track record against some of the largest corporations. Our firm was one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, a monumental case against a corporate giant. With extensive federal court experience, we are not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their well-funded defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won, applying the same rigor and strategic thinking to fighting powerful defendants in hazing cases. Ralph Manginello’s comprehensive credentials 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 and catastrophic injury cases, working with economists to value lifetime losses and securing significant compensation for families. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force genuine accountability. Learn more about our wrongful death experience at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/.
• Dual Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the prestigious Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides invaluable insight into the criminal aspects of hazing. This dual expertise means we understand how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation, allowing us to advise witnesses and former members with dual legal exposure comprehensively. Discover more about our criminal defense capabilities at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/.
• Investigative Depth: We deploy a wide network of experts—medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists—to build an unshakeable case. We have experience obtaining hidden evidence like deleted group chats, subpoenaing national fraternity records showing prior incidents, and uncovering university files through aggressive discovery tactics. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911 operates from our Houston office, serving families throughout Texas, including Montague County and its surrounding areas—from Bowie, Nocona, and Saint Jo to areas along the Red River. We understand that hazing at major Texas universities impacts families across the entire region.

Our expertise extends to understanding:

• How fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments actually operate behind closed doors, often with a culture of secrecy and embedded traditions.
• Modern investigative techniques for hazing, including digital evidence recovery, expert witness collaboration, and navigating the complexities of institutional records.
• What makes hazing cases uniquely challenging: powerful, well-resourced institutional defendants, intricate insurance coverage disputes, and the delicate balance between victim privacy and public accountability.

We believe that our job is not just about legal victories; it’s about getting you answers, holding the responsible parties accountable, and helping to prevent this from happening to another family. We approach every case with empathy, knowing this is one of the hardest things a family can face, balancing thorough investigation with a commitment to real accountability.

Call to Action: Your Next Step Towards Justice

If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus—whether at the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor, or another institution—we want to hear from you. Families in Montague County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers, accountability, and justice.

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

In your free consultation, you can expect us to:

• Listen attentively to your story and the details of the hazing incident.
• Review any evidence you may have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• Explain your legal options, which may include pursuing a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• Discuss realistic timelines for a legal case and what you can expect during the process.
• Answer your questions about costs; our contingency fee basis means we don’t get paid unless we win your case.
• Provide a pressure-free environment for you to decide your next steps. Everything you tell us is strictly confidential.

You don’t have to face this alone. Schedule your free consultation today:

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

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

Whether you’re in Montague County or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, The Manginello Law Firm is here to help you seek full accountability and justice. 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