Hazing on Texas Campuses: A Comprehensive Guide for Real County Families

A chilly night in College Station, deep in the heart of Texas. A parent from Real County receives a panicked, garbled call: “Mom, I can’t breathe. They made me drink…” The line goes dead. Their child, a bright student from a tight-knit Real County community, is at an off-campus fraternity house during “pledge night.” Others are filming on phones, chanting, laughing, as their child collapses. Nobody wants to call 911, afraid of “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble” – or worse, getting expelled. The student feels trapped between a fierce desire for belonging to a powerful organization and their own imminent danger.

This scenario isn’t isolated. It’s a terrifying reality for too many families, including those right here in Real County, who send their children to universities across Texas. Our rural communities in Real County, nestled in the scenic Texas Hill Country, value hard work, integrity, and safety. When our children leave for college, whether it’s up the road to Bandera County or Gillespie County, or further east to Houston, Austin, or College Station, we trust they’ll be safe. Unfortunately, the dark underbelly of hazing can shatter that trust and devastate lives.

This comprehensive guide is written for families in Real County and across Texas who need to understand the complex, often hidden, world of campus hazing. We will explore:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, far beyond the old campus movie stereotypes.
• The intricacies of Texas and federal laws designed to combat hazing.
• Critical lessons from major national hazing cases and how their precedents impact Texas families.
• The concerning patterns of hazing activity at our state’s prominent institutions: the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University.
• The deep-seated histories of various fraternities and sororities, both locally on campus and nationally, that contribute to ongoing risks.
• The legal pathways and strategies available to victims and families in Real County and throughout Texas seeking accountability and justice.

This article provides general information and insights, not specific legal advice. Every hazing incident has its unique details, and only a direct consultation with an experienced attorney can offer tailored guidance. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, we serve families across Texas, including those from Camp Wood, Leakey, and other communities across Real County, who are navigating the aftermath of campus hazing.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

If your child is in physical danger RIGHT NOW—intoxicated, seriously injured, or actively threatened:

• Call 911 immediately for medical emergencies. Prioritize their health and safety above all else.
• Then, contact Attorney911 without delay: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911). We specialize in immediate legal assistance because when a crisis strikes, you need Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

In the critical first 48 hours following any suspected hazing incident:

• Secure immediate medical attention. Even if your child insists they are “fine,” insist on a medical evaluation.
• Act swiftly to preserve vital evidence BEFORE it vanishes. This is paramount.
  • Screenshot all relevant group chats, text messages, and direct messages (DMs) the moment you see them. Hazers delete evidence rapidly.
  • Photograph any injuries from multiple angles, ensuring timestamps and context are captured.
  • Collect and secure any physical items involved, such as damaged clothing, receipts for forced purchases, or objects used in the hazing.
• Document everything accurately and immediately. While memories are fresh, write down key details: who was involved, exactly what happened, when, and where.
• Crucially, do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity, sorority, or organization directly. This often leads only to immediate cover-ups and destruction of evidence.
  • Sign any documents from the university, college, or any insurance company without first consulting with legal counsel. These documents can waive vital rights.
  • Post any details about the incident on public social media. Such posts can inadvertently compromise your child’s legal position.
  • Allow your child to delete messages, photos, or attempt to “clean up” any evidence. Every piece of digital information can be crucial.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within the first 24–48 hours. Evidence related to hazing vanishes at an alarming rate—group chats are deleted, physical items disappear, and witnesses are coached to remain silent. Universities also move quickly to control the narrative. We can help you preserve critical evidence, understand your child’s legal rights, and determine the optimal path forward. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for an immediate, confidential consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Real County families, “hazing” might conjure images of movie scenes from decades past – a few paddle swats or embarrassing stunts. However, the reality of hazing in 2025 on Texas campuses is far more insidious, dangerous, and technologically sophisticated. It’s not just “boys will be boys” or harmless fun; it’s a calculated system of control, humiliation, and often, severe abuse, designed to instill loyalty through shared trauma.

Hazing is broadly defined, in plain English, as any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, maintaining membership, or gaining status within a group, where that behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits an individual. A common defense tactic is to claim the victim “agreed to it,” but under Texas law and decades of legal precedent, “agreement” under duress, peer pressure, or power imbalance does not make hazing safe or legal. The desire to belong is a powerful motivator, and exploiters leverage this.

Main Categories of Hazing in Modern Campus Environments

Modern hazing takes many forms, often blending different tactics to maximize control and minimize detection.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains the most common and deadliest form of hazing.

  • Forced or Coerced Drinking: Pledges are compelled to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol, often hard liquor, sometimes in drinking games or “lineups” designed to ensure rapid intoxication.
  • Chugging Challenges: Competitions to quickly consume entire handles or bottles of alcohol.
  • “Big/Little” Reveals: Events designed to pair new members with older members, often involving pledges being pressured to drink copious amounts of alcohol. These events are frequently linked to severe alcohol poisoning incidents.
  • Unknown Substances: Pledges may be pressured to consume unknown or mixed substances, including drugs.

• Physical Hazing: Despite anti-hazing laws and policies, physical abuse persists, often escalating from seemingly minor acts.

  • Paddling and Beatings: While officially banned by nearly all national organizations, physical beatings, including the use of paddles, remain a clandestine practice in many chapters, especially NPHC organizations that trace these “traditions.”
  • Extreme Calisthenics or “Workouts”: Forced, prolonged physical exertion far beyond what is safe or reasonable for normal conditioning, often performed in extreme weather or late at night. These are sometimes called “smokings.”
  • Sleep, Food, and Water Deprivation: Pledges are denied adequate sleep through late-night meetings, forced tasks, or being woken at odd hours. Food and water can be restricted, or pledges may be forced to consume unpalatable or excessive amounts of certain foods.
  • Exposure to Dangerous Environments: Leaving pledges in extreme cold or heat, in isolated areas, or forcing them to perform tasks in unsanitary or unsafe conditions.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These acts Strip recruits of dignity, foster shame, and create a strong bond through shared, degrading experiences.

  • Forced Nudity or Partial Nudity: Compelling pledges to be naked or partially naked, often in front of other members or even recorded.
  • Simulated Sexual Acts: Forcing pledges to perform or participate in simulated sexual acts, “elephant walks,” “roasted pig” positions, or other sexually degrading scenarios.
  • Racial or Sexist Overtones: Acts with explicit racial, homophobic, or sexist slurs, role-playing stereotypes, or forcing minority members to perform degrading acts tailored to their identity. This is particularly prevalent in Texas, unfortunately, and can lead to severe mental and physical trauma.

• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but profoundly damaging, this involves tactics to break down an individual psychologically.

  • Verbal Abuse and Threats: Constant yelling, screaming, insults, degrading language, and explicit or implicit threats of retaliation or expulsion.
  • Social Isolation: Cutting pledges off from outside contacts, family, friends, or even their personal lives, demanding total dedication to the organization.
  • Manipulation and Forced Confessions: psychological games designed to make pledges confess false wrongdoings or reveal personal information under duress.
  • Public Shaming: Forcing pledges to perform embarrassing acts in public, or using social media to ridicule individuals.

• Digital/Online Hazing: Hazing has adapted to the digital age, using technology to extend control and humiliation 24/7.

  • Group Chat Command and Control: Constant demands and tasks issued through GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, or fraternity-specific apps, requiring immediate responses regardless of time. Failure to respond often results in punishment.
  • Social Media Humiliation: Forcing pledges to create embarrassing videos for TikTok, post degrading content on Instagram or Snapchat, or participate in online “challenges” that are humiliating or risky.
  • Cyberstalking and Location Tracking: Requiring pledges to share their live location via apps like Find My Friends or Snapchat Maps, tracking their movements, and harassing them if they deviate from expected behavior.
  • Coerced Recordings: Pressuring pledges to record hazing events or compromising acts involving themselves or others, creating blackmail material.

The common threads running through all these forms of hazing are power imbalance, coercion, secrecy, and the potential for mental and physical harm. What might start as “subtle hazing” (such as mandatory late-night meetings that interfere with academics) can quickly escalate to “harassment hazing” (sleep deprivation, verbal abuse), and ultimately to “violent hazing” (forced drinking, physical beatings, sexualized acts) that leads to catastrophic injury or death.

Where Hazing Actually Happens in Texas

While fraternities and sororities often dominate the headlines, hazing is not exclusive to “frat houses.” Real County families need to understand that hazing can occur in a wide variety of campus organizations across the state:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes those under Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council (Panhel), National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC – Divine Nine), and various multicultural Greek councils.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: Organizations with hierarchical structures often seen at institutions like Texas A&M can be particularly susceptible to hazing masquerading as “tradition” or “discipline.”
• Spirit Squads and Tradition Clubs: Groups like the Texas Cowboys or other university spirit or tradition-based organizations have faced allegations or confirmed incidents of hazing.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming, cheerleading, and smaller club sports, hazing can be a pervasive issue in athletic programs striving for “team bonding.”
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign groups can engage in hazing under the guise of building camaraderie or maintaining a specific culture.
• Academic, Cultural, and Service Organizations: Any group where members seek belonging or advancement can, unfortunately, become a breeding ground for hazing if left unchecked.

The underlying forces are often the same: social status, a desire for conformity, the weight of “tradition,” and a powerful code of silence that allows these practices to persist, even when participants know hazing is illegal and dangerous. For families from Real County, this means understanding that no student, regardless of their chosen university or organization, is entirely immune from this risk.

Law & Liability Framework: Texas and Federal

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing is crucial for families in Real County and throughout Texas seeking accountability. Texas has specific laws prosecuting hazing, and federal regulations add another layer of oversight.

Texas Hazing Law Basics: Education Code § 37.151 et seq.

Texas has clear statutory prohibitions against hazing, primarily outlined in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. These laws make it unequivocally clear that hazing is a serious offense with significant consequences.

• Definition of Hazing (§ 37.151): The law broadly defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed by one person or with others, on or off campus, against a student, that:

  • Endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student, AND
  • Occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.
    In plain terms, if someone makes a student engage in an act that is dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they either intended for it to happen or were reckless about the risks involved, that constitutes hazing under Texas law. Key takeaways from this definition include:
  • Location is irrelevant: Hazing can happen literally anywhere—on campus, at an off-campus house, at a private retreat, or even online.
  • Harm is not just physical: It covers both physical and significant mental or emotional harm.
  • Intent not always required: Even if there was no malicious intent to harm, recklessness (knowing the risk and proceeding anyway) is sufficient.

• Criminal Penalties (§ 37.152): Texas law assigns criminal penalties for those who commit hazing:

  • Class B Misdemeanor: Most hazing incidents, especially those not resulting in serious injury, are classified as a Class B misdemeanor, carrying potential jail time of up to 180 days and a fine of up to $2,000.
  • Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury and requires medical attention, the charge can be elevated to a Class A misdemeanor.
  • State Jail Felony: Critically, if hazing results in serious bodily injury or death, the offense becomes a state jail felony, carrying more severe penalties.
    The law also criminalizes failing to report hazing (if you are a member or officer and knew about it) and retaliating against someone who reports hazing.

• Organizational Liability (§ 37.153): This is a crucial element missing in some states. In Texas, not only individuals but also the organizations themselves (fraternities, sororities, clubs, teams) can be criminally prosecuted for hazing if:

  • The organization authorized or encouraged the hazing, OR
  • An officer or member, acting in their official capacity, knew about the hazing and failed to report or stop it.
    Penalties for organizations can include fines up to $10,000 per violation. Universities also typically reserve the right to revoke recognition and ban the implicated organization from campus, sometimes permanently. This provision highlights that the responsibility extends beyond individual members to the group as a whole.

• Immunity for Good-Faith Reporting (§ 37.154): To encourage reporting, Texas law grants immunity from civil or criminal liability to anyone who, in good faith, reports a hazing incident to university authorities or law enforcement. Furthermore, in medical emergencies, Texas law (and many university policies) offers amnesty for students who call 911 seeking help, even if they were underage drinking or involved in the hazing. While designed to protect, fear of social consequences or retaliation can still make students hesitant to report.

• Consent Not a Defense (§ 37.155): This is perhaps one of the most powerful provisions. The statute explicitly states that it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the activity. This directly addresses the common defense tactic of blaming the victim. Courts and juries recognize that true, informed consent is impossible in a coercive environment.

• Reporting by Educational Institutions (§ 37.156): Texas colleges and universities are mandated to:

  • Provide hazing prevention education to students.
  • Clearly publish their hazing policies.
  • Maintain and make public annual reports of hazing violations and disciplinary actions.
    This public transparency (as seen, for example, on UT Austin’s hazing.utexas.edu website) creates a historical record that can be invaluable in demonstrating patterns of misconduct and an organization’s knowledge of its chapters’ behaviors.

Criminal vs. Civil Hazing Cases

It is important for Real County families to understand the distinct purposes and processes of criminal and civil legal actions related to hazing.

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (the district attorney or prosecutor’s office) on behalf of the public. The primary aim is punishment—jail time, fines, or probation—for violating state laws. Hazing-related criminal charges can range from the direct hazing offenses themselves to more serious charges like furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, or, in tragic cases, manslaughter.
• Civil Cases: These are brought by the victims (or their surviving family members in wrongful death cases). The primary aim is monetary compensation for the harms suffered and to hold responsible parties accountable. Civil claims often focus on theories of:
  • Negligence and Gross Negligence: That individuals or organizations failed to act reasonably, leading to injury. Gross negligence implies a reckless disregard for safety.
  • Wrongful Death: When a hazing incident results in a fatality.
  • Negligent Hiring/Supervision: If university employees, coaches, or advisors failed in their duties to oversee students or organizations.
  • Premises Liability: If hazing occurred on property where the owner failed to maintain a safe environment.
  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: For severe psychological harm.

Crucially, a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for a civil lawsuit. The burden of proof is lower in civil cases, and civil and criminal actions can proceed concurrently.

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

Beyond state law, federal regulations play an increasing role in addressing hazing, particularly at institutions receiving federal funding.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation requires colleges and universities receiving federal student aid to:
  • Publicly report hazing incidents in a more transparent and standardized manner.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention efforts.
  • Maintain and share public data on hazing, enhancing accountability across the nation. These requirements are being phased in by 2026.
• Title IX: When hazing involves sex discrimination, sexual assault, or gender-based harassment (including sexualized hazing), Title IX federal civil rights law is triggered. This requires universities to investigate and respond promptly, with penalties for non-compliance.
• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges to report campus crime data, including certain types of assault and alcohol/drug violations. Many severe hazing incidents fall under Clery reporting requirements, providing another data point for pattern evidence.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit?

Civil hazing lawsuits can involve multiple defendants, reflecting the layers of responsibility in campus organizations and institutions. Identifying all potentially liable parties is a critical step in these complex cases.

• Individual Students: Those who actively planned, carried out, or directly participated in the hazing, supplied dangerous substances (like alcohol to minors), or engaged in cover-up activities.
• Local Chapters/Organizations: The recognized student group itself (if structured as a legal entity), as well as its officers (e.g., the president, new member educator, risk management chair) who directed or condoned the hazing.
• National Fraternities/Sororities: The national headquarters, which maintains policies, collects dues, and often has oversight over local chapters. National liability often hinges on whether they knew or should have known about a chapter’s propensity for hazing, or if a pattern of similar incidents across other chapters made the current incident “foreseeable.”
• Universities or Governing Boards: The educational institution itself, including its administrators, faculty advisors, and even campus police. While public universities in Texas may assert sovereign immunity, exceptions can apply, particularly concerning gross negligence, Title IX violations, or when suing specific individuals in their personal capacity. Private universities typically have fewer immunity protections.
• Third Parties: This can include property owners (e.g., landlords of off-campus houses where hazing occurred), venue operators, or even alcohol vendors who violated dram shop laws by serving minors or obviously intoxicated individuals.

Each case is highly fact-specific; not every party is liable in every situation. A thorough investigation is required to identify all responsible entities. Our Real County families should understand that the legal framework is designed to provide avenues for justice and accountability, although navigating it requires significant expertise.

National Hazing Case Patterns: Anchor Stories Beyond Texas

While hazing tragedies grab local headlines in Texas schools, it’s vital for families in Real County to recognize that these incidents are part of a broader, disturbing national pattern. Major cases across the country have shaped anti-hazing laws, exposed institutional failures, and established legal precedents that we leverage in Texas courts. These “anchor stories” demonstrate the serious consequences that arise from cultures of secrecy, peer pressure, and deliberate indifference.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern: A Recurring Tragedy

Forced or excessive alcohol consumption remains the single most common cause of hazing fatalities. These cases offer stark warnings and critical legal lessons.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (February 2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after participating in a “bid acceptance” event where he was forced to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol. Over hours, security cameras captured him falling repeatedly, sustaining traumatic brain injuries. Fraternity members initially delayed calling 911 for nearly 12 hours, attempting to cover up the incident. This led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, widespread civil litigation, and the passing of the landmark Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania, a felony hazing statute. The key takeaway for Texas families is the devastating interplay of extreme intoxication, deliberate delay in seeking medical help, and a pervasive culture of silence that compounds the tragedy and escalates legal liability.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (November 2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old FSU pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and forced to consume them rapidly. The incident led to criminal hazing charges against several Pi Kappa Phi members. Florida State University responded by temporarily suspending all Greek life, sparking a movement for statewide anti-hazing reform in Florida. This case tragically illustrates how formulaic, tradition-laden drinking nights, seemingly harmless to participants, are a recurring script for disaster, signaling a clear pattern of organizational negligence.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (September 2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game where answering questions incorrectly resulted in forced drinking. His blood alcohol content was a staggering 0.495% at the time of his death. The tragedy spurred Louisiana to enact the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute that made hazing resulting in serious injury or death a felony offense. This case powerfully demonstrates how political and legislative change often follows public outrage and clear, undeniable proof of hazing’s devastating impact. His family settled with the university and later secured a $6.1 million verdict against an individual.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (March 2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, was forced to consume an entire bottle of absolute vodka as part of a “Big/Little” reveal night. He died three days later from alcohol poisoning. The incident led to multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members. The Foltz family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with $7 million coming from the national Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity and approximately $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This case underscores that universities and national fraternities alike can face immense financial and reputational consequences when their organizations fail to prevent known hazing rituals. Individual officers can also face massive personal liability, as seen when a court ordered former Pi Kappa Alpha president Daylen Dunson personally to pay $6.5 million to the Foltz family.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern: Beyond Alcohol

While alcohol-related deaths dominate the headlines, brutal physical and ritualistic hazing continues to cause severe injury and death.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (December 2013): Michael Deng, an 18-year-old pledge, was subjected to a violent blindfolded “glass ceiling” ritual at a remote fraternity retreat in Pennsylvania’s Pocono Mountains. He was tackled repeatedly and died from a traumatic brain injury after help was intentionally delayed by fraternity members for hours to orchestrate a cover-up. This landmark case resulted in multiple criminal convictions for individual members, and uniquely, the national Pi Delta Psi fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter. The organization was banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years. This tragedy highlights that off-campus “retreats” can be as dangerous or even more so than on-campus events, and that national organizations can be held directly liable for their chapters’ conduct, especially when “traditions” involve known dangerous acts.

• Danny Santulli – University of Missouri, Phi Gamma Delta (October 2021): Danny Santulli, an 18-year-old pledge, was forced to consume excessive alcohol during a “pledge dad reveal” night. He suffered severe, permanent brain damage, leaving him unable to walk, talk, or see, requiring 24/7 care. The Santulli family settled lawsuits with 22 defendants, including the fraternity, with settlement amounts largely confidential but reportedly multi-million-dollar. This case is a harrowing example of catastrophic non-fatal hazing injury and demonstrates that the lifetime costs of such tragedies are astronomical.

• San Diego State University, Phi Kappa Psi (2024): In a shocking incident, a pledge was set on fire during a party skit, resulting in third-degree burns over 16% of his body. Four fraternity members were charged with felonies including causing a fire with great bodily injury, conspiracy, and violating social host ordinances, facing potentially years in prison. This rare case of burn hazing underscores the evolving and increasingly dangerous methods used by hazers.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse: A Widespread Issue

Hazing is unfortunately not confined to Greek letter organizations alone, and major athletic programs are not immune.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): Multiple former football players alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the prestigious Northwestern football program over several years. The scandal led to the firing of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed a wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university, which was confidentially settled. This ongoing situation demonstrates that hazing can permeate major athletic programs, often under the guise of “team building,” and can involve deeply disturbing and discriminatory acts. It also raises crucial questions about institutional oversight and the responsibility of university leadership.

What These National Cases Mean for Real County Families in Texas

The common threads running through these national tragedies are chillingly consistent: forced drinking, extreme physical challenges, psychological manipulation, public humiliation, and, critically, delayed or denied medical care often followed by coordinated cover-up attempts. These cases show that:

• Reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements or verdicts frequently only occur after a tragedy and sustained legal action.
• These precedents create a foundation that Real County families can leverage in Texas courts.
• If your child attends UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor, or any other Texas institution and is experiencing or has experienced hazing, you are not alone. These national lessons contribute to the legal landscape and strategic approaches we use to seek justice against those responsible.

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

For Texas families, especially those from Real County and our surrounding communities like Uvalde County or Kerr County, the hazing crisis hits close to home. Many of our bright students attend these major universities, making their policies, cultures, and past incidents directly relevant. Our firm, from its Houston roots, serves families across the state, including in the Texas Hill Country and South Texas. We understand how important it is to provide specific context for the institutions that draw so many of our students.

University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus, is home to a diverse student body and active Greek life. Students from Real County may choose UH for its strong academic programs and proximity to Houston, a major metropolitan area.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH is one of Texas’s largest universities, with a mix of commuter and residential students. Its Greek system is robust, encompassing IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, and multicultural fraternities and sororities. Beyond Greek life, numerous other student organizations, sports clubs, and cultural groups contribute to campus life, some of which have unfortunately also faced hazing allegations.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, clearly stating that hazing is prohibited whether it occurs on-campus or off-campus. Their policy explicitly bans acts like forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, mental distress, and other behaviors used for initiation or affiliation. UH provides multiple reporting channels, including the Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). The university also publishes a general statement on hazing and, to some extent, disciplinary actions on its website.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UH has had its share of hazing incidents that draw public concern and legal action:

• 2016 Pi Kappa Alpha Case: In a particularly severe incident, pledges of Pi Kappa Alpha allegedly endured prolonged sleep and food deprivation during a multi-day event. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being violently slammed onto a hard surface. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges from law enforcement and received a university suspension. This case highlighted the physical dangers and legal consequences hazing at UH can entail.
• Ongoing Disciplinary Actions: While not always involving physical injury, UH’s disciplinary records have indicated repeated instances of organizations being sanctioned for behavior “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” including alcohol misuse, degrading activities, and policy violations. These repeated infractions sometimes lead to suspensions and probation for various fraternities and sororities within the UH Greek system.

While UH issues suspensions and disciplinary actions, Real County families should be aware that the public availability of detailed misconduct records at UH may not be as comprehensive as at some other Texas universities, making thorough investigation even more critical.

How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a hazing incident at UH, legal proceedings can involve multiple agencies and jurisdictions. Depending on the location of the incident (on-campus or off-campus in Houston), criminal investigations could be handled by UHPD or the Houston Police Department (HPD). Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in courts within Harris County, where Houston is located.

Potential defendants in a UH hazing case could include individual students directly involved, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and potentially the university itself, particularly if there was a pattern of ignored warnings or negligent oversight. Property owners of off-campus residences where hazing occurred might also be included.

What UH Students & Parents Should Do

• Know UH’s Reporting Channels: Be familiar with how to report hazing directly to the Dean of Students, UHPD, or through any anonymous online portals.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: Preserve all digital communications, photographs, and medical records. This cannot be stressed enough; these pieces of evidence form the backbone of any investigation or legal action.
• Review Prior Incidents: While detailed public records may be less overt, seek information regarding any past disciplinary actions against a specific organization. An experienced attorney can use discovery processes to uncover internal university files.
• Seek Legal Counsel Immediately: If you suspect hazing has caused harm, contact an attorney experienced in Houston-based hazing cases. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, from its Houston office, has significant experience navigating the complexities of university and organizational accountability. We can help uncover prior discipline and internal files that may not be publicly accessible.

Texas A&M University

A&M’s deep-rooted traditions and highly organized campus life, particularly the Corps of Cadets, create a unique environment that, while fostering camaraderie, can also be susceptible to hazing. Students from Real County, with our strong rural values, often find a natural fit at A&M, making hazing concerns here particularly poignant.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M University is renowned for its traditions, fierce loyalty, and the distinctive presence of the Corps of Cadets. Alongside a large and active Greek scene (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, multicultural), various spirit organizations, athletic teams, and the Corps itself shape the campus culture. The emphasis on tradition and loyalty can, regrettably, sometimes be exploited under the guise of “bonding” experiences, making hazing a persistent concern.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

Texas A&M strictly prohibits hazing across all student organizations, including the Corps of Cadets. Their policies, enforced by the Student Conduct Office and various university departments, explicitly outline prohibited behaviors, from physical abuse and forced consumption to psychological torment. A&M provides clear reporting mechanisms via the Student Conduct office, the University Police Department (UPD), and specific channels within the Corps of Cadets.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced significant hazing incidents both within its Greek system and its revered Corps of Cadets:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Chemical Burns Case (circa 2021): In a harrowing incident, two SAE pledges alleged they were subjected to strenuous physical activity and then had various substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, poured on them. This resulted in severe chemical burns requiring emergency skin graft surgeries. The SAE chapter was suspended by the university for two years, and the pledges subsequently filed a $1 million lawsuit against the fraternity. This case powerfully demonstrates the extreme, dangerous, and sometimes novel forms hazing can take, with lasting physical consequences.
• Corps of Cadets Sexualized Hazing Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a federal lawsuit alleging he endured degrading and sexualized hazing. This included being subjected to simulated sexual acts by other cadets and being physically bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple forced into his mouth. The cadet sought over $1 million in damages, highlighting that hazing can involve deeply humiliating and traumatic sexual acts, not just physical beatings or forced drinking. Texas A&M stated it addressed the matter through its internal disciplinary processes.
• Kappa Sigma Rhabdomyolysis Allegations (2023, ongoing): Recent allegations against the Kappa Sigma fraternity involve hazing practices so intense they led to rhabdomyolysis – a severe muscle breakdown that can cause kidney damage. This points to extreme physical hazing, often under the guise of “workouts” or “conditioning.” These cases underscore a continuing pattern of unsafe “physical challenges” at A&M.

These incidents underscore that hazing at Texas A&M transcends Greek life, permeating highly structured groups like the Corps, and can involve significant physical and psychological trauma.

How an A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases at Texas A&M typically involve investigations by the University Police Department (UPD) and Texas A&M’s Student Conduct office. Depending on the nature and severity of the incident, criminal charges may be filed by local prosecutors in Brazos County. Civil lawsuits would be heard in Brazos County district courts, or potentially federal court if federal civil rights claims (like Title IX) are involved.

Potential defendants often include the individual perpetrators, the local chapter, the national organization (e.g., SAE, Kappa Sigma), and potentially Texas A&M University itself, through claims of negligent supervision, creating a dangerous environment, or failing to enforce its own policies. Claims against the university may be complex due to potential assertions of sovereign immunity by this public institution.

What A&M Students & Parents Should Do

• Understand A&M’s Specific Policies: Be thoroughly familiar with the university’s hazing policies and the distinct regulations within the Corps of Cadets, as these often have different reporting mechanisms.
• Document and Preserve Evidence: Given the digital nature of modern hazing, gather screenshots of all relevant group chats, social media posts, and messages immediately. Photograph any injuries meticulously.
• Report Internally AND Externally: Consider reporting to both Texas A&M Student Conduct/UPD and, for criminal acts, the Brazos County Sheriff’s Office or College Station Police Department.
• Seek Legal Advice Early: If your child has been injured or suffered psychological harm, contact an attorney who understands both Greek life and Corps culture at A&M. Our firm has experience with cases involving powerful institutions and can help navigate the unique dynamics of A&M, from College Station families to those in nearby Bryan, Grimes County, or even back home in Real County.

University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin, a flagship institution, is known for its academic rigor, vibrant campus culture, and a deeply embedded Greek system. UT’s proactive approach to publicizing hazing violations provides valuable insight, even for families in Real County who may be far from Travis County.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin boasts a large and dynamic student population, characterized by a spirited campus culture and a dominant Greek presence (Panhellenic, IFC, Texas Asian Pan-Hellenic Council, NPHC). Numerous spirit organizations, performance groups, and athletic teams also contribute to the campus environment. While this can foster strong communities, it also means a broad spectrum of organizations where hazing can occur.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

UT Austin maintains a robust anti-hazing policy, clearly defining prohibited conduct and emphasizing that hazing is illegal regardless of location. The university utilizes a comprehensive reporting system, including the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct and Academic Integrity, and the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD).

Critically, UT Austin sets itself apart through its highly public and transparent Hazing Violations page (hazing.utexas.edu). This public log details organizations, specific hazing conduct, and the sanctions imposed, providing an invaluable resource for parents and legal counsel.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public records reveal a consistent pattern of hazing violations across various organizations:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): This specific chapter was sanctioned after new members were directed to consume excessive milk and forced to perform strenuous calisthenics. UT found this constituted hazing, placing the chapter on probation and requiring new hazing-prevention education. This pattern reflects the national Pi Kappa Alpha trend of alcohol-related and physical hazing.
• Texas Wranglers (2022): A long-standing spirit organization, the Texas Wranglers, faced sanctions for forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, and other punishment-based practices targeting new members. This highlights that hazing isn’t confined to Greek life but permeates other tradition-rich groups.
• Multiple Organizations: UT’s public log consistently shows numerous fraternities, sororities, and other student groups disciplined for various hazing behaviors, including forced consumption, degrading activities, and sleep deprivation. These records demonstrate a persistent struggle with hazing despite strict policies and public transparency.

UT Austin’s commitment to publicizing violations, while revealing uncomfortable truths, is a useful tool for accountability. It allows Real County families to see if specific organizations their children are joining have a documented history of misconduct, which can be critical evidence in any legal claim.

How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at UT Austin, criminal investigations could involve UTPD or the Austin Police Department (APD), depending on the location of the offense. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in Travis County district courts, or if federal claims are involved, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, located in Austin.

Potential defendants would include individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially the university itself. Given UT’s status as a public institution, sovereign immunity may be a relevant defense, though exceptions (particularly for gross negligence or Title IX violations) can apply. The detailed public record of hazing violations maintained by UT Austin can be a powerful asset for plaintiffs, demonstrating a pattern of problematic behavior and the university’s prior knowledge or inaction.

What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

• Consult UT’s Hazing Violations Page: Before joining any organization, thoroughly review UT’s public hazing log at hazing.utexas.edu. This is invaluable due diligence for Real County families.
• Report Promptly: Utilize UT’s established reporting channels, including the Dean of Students, UTPD, or the Title IX Office (if applicable).
• Prioritize Evidence Collection: Digitally capture all communication, photos, and videos related to any suspected hazing. Any reported incidents on UT’s public log provide essential context for potential civil action.
• Engage Legal Professionals: Given the university’s public data and the complex legal landscape of a large public institution, consulting an attorney experienced in UT Austin hazing cases is highly recommended. Our Houston-based firm extends its services to families throughout Texas, including those sending their children from Real County to Austin and its vibrant surrounding communities like Round Rock, Pflugerville, or San Marcos.

Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, a private institution nestled in Dallas, exudes an atmosphere of academic excellence and a prominent Greek life. Students from Real County may find its rigorous academic programs and vibrant social scene appealing, attracting talent from across Texas.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is a private, well-resourced university with a reputation for a robust social scene dominated by its active Greek community (Panhellenic, IFC). The emphasis on tradition and social status within these organizations can, at times, foster environments where hazing behaviors develop and persist under the radar.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

SMU maintains a firm stance against hazing, outlining prohibited conduct in its Student Code of Conduct. Their policy encompasses all forms of hazing, from physical and alcohol-related abuses to psychological and humiliating acts. SMU offers various reporting mechanisms, including the Dean of Students office, campus police, and anonymous reporting systems like Real Response, designed to enhance student safety.

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

While SMU’s records are not as publicly transparent as UT Austin’s due to its private university status, past incidents and suspensions have been reported:

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): This fraternity chapter faced significant repercussions following allegations of severe hazing. Reports indicated that new members were subjected to paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and extreme sleep deprivation. SMU suspended the chapter, imposing strict restrictions on its activities and recruitment for several years. This incident highlighted the traditional forms of physical and alcohol hazing that can occur even in privileged campus environments.
• Additional Chapter Suspensions: Over the years, other Greek chapters at SMU have faced suspensions or probationary periods for various hazing-related offenses, signaling ongoing issues despite the university’s official policies and reporting mechanisms.

These incidents demonstrate that even at private institutions with high tuition and strict codes, hazing remains a persistent challenge, often exacerbated by a culture of secrecy.

How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at SMU, criminal investigations would typically fall under the jurisdiction of the Dallas Police Department (DPD), as campus police might have limited jurisdiction for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would generally be filed in Dallas County district courts.

Potential defendants in an SMU hazing case could include individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and SMU itself. As a private university, SMU would not be protected by sovereign immunity, potentially simplifying certain aspects of litigation compared to public institutions. However, private institutions often intensely protect their reputations, making skillful legal navigation critical. Our Real County community members should understand that pursuing claims at a private university like SMU requires experienced legal counsel capable of compelling discovery even when internal reports are not publicly posted.

What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

• Utilize SMU’s Reporting Systems: Familiarize yourself with SMU’s Dean of Students office and its anonymous reporting tools.
• Document and Prioritize Evidence: Just like at any major university, immediate and thorough preservation of digital and physical evidence is paramount.
• Understand Private University Dynamics: Be aware that while SMU does not have sovereign immunity, internal investigations and disclosures may be less transparent than at public institutions.
• Seek Experienced Legal Counsel Early: An attorney experienced in navigating private university hazing cases, particularly those in North Texas, can make a significant difference. Our firm serves families throughout Texas, including those from smaller communities in Real County who have children attending universities in Dallas and the broader DFW Metroplex, including Plano, Frisco, Irving, and Arlington.

Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Baptist institution in Waco, has a unique identity characterized by its faith-based mission, strong academics, and a vibrant student life. Yet, even with its values-driven approach, Baylor has confronted its share of institutional challenges, including hazing incidents. Real County families value institutions that uphold strong moral codes, and hazing at such a university can be particularly disillusioning.

Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor offers a distinct campus experience with a large Greek community (Panhellenic, IFC, NPHC, multicultural) and numerous student organizations. The university has a history of high-profile challenges, notably the scandal involving its football program and Title IX violations related to sexual assault. This history shapes how any allegations of misconduct, including hazing, are perceived and handled at Baylor.

Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing across all student organizations. Its policies align with Texas law, defining hazing broadly to include any act that endangers mental or physical health or safety. Baylor encourages reporting through its Office of Student Conduct, Baylor Police Department (BUPD), and its Title IX Office (for cases involving gender-based misconduct).

Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s journey through past institutional challenges provides context for its current handling of misconduct:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): A significant incident involved the Baylor baseball team, where a hazing investigation led to the suspension of 14 players. These suspensions were staggered across the early season, indicating the university’s response to clear policy violations within its athletic programs. This incident underscored that even at an institution with a strong faith-based identity, hazing can tragically impact prestigious collegiate sports.
• Broader Cultural Challenges: Baylor’s prior high-profile issues around its football program and sexual assault allegations (often intertwined with an institutional failure to investigate) inform how any new hazing claims are evaluated. The university has made public commitments to transparency and accountability, crucial for Real County families.

These incidents, particularly within the athletics context, highlight Baylor’s ongoing struggle with student misconduct and institutional oversight, even under intense public scrutiny.

How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at Baylor, criminal investigations would involve BUPD or the Waco Police Department (WPD). Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in McLennan County district courts.

Potential defendants in a Baylor hazing case could include individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and Baylor University itself. As a private university, Baylor does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it a direct potential defendant in civil suits. Given Baylor’s recent history, there is often heightened public and legal scrutiny on its response to misconduct allegations.

What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

• Understand Baylor’s Commitment to Accountability: While past issues exist, Baylor has publicly committed to improved oversight. Families should familiarize themselves with these renewed efforts.
• Utilize All Reporting Avenues: Report directly to Baylor’s Office of Student Conduct and BUPD. If the hazing involves gender-based misconduct, report to the Title IX office.
• Systematic Evidence Collection: Meticulously collect all digital and physical evidence. This is crucial for strengthening any potential claim.
• Consult an Experienced Hazing Attorney: An attorney who understands Baylor’s unique institutional context and its past challenges, while serving families from Real County to communities like Hewitt, Woodway, and Temple, can provide invaluable guidance. Our firm is equipped to navigate the complex interplay of university policies, state law, and organizational dynamics specific to Baylor.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

On any Texas college campus—from the sprawling urban environment of UH to the tradition-rich grounds of Texas A&M, the energetic hub of UT Austin, the elite setting of SMU, or the faith-based community of Baylor—Greek life plays a significant role. These fraternities and sororities, though operating locally, are almost universally part of national organizations. When hazing occurs, their long national histories become critically important. For our Real County families, understanding these deeper patterns can illuminate the true depth of responsibility when campuses fail to prevent harm.

Why National Histories Matter in Texas Hazing Cases

Many parents are surprised to learn that a hazing incident at a local chapter in Texas, say a Pi Kappa Alpha chapter at UT Austin, is not an isolated event. This is because:

• Pattern Evidence: National fraternities and sororities often have strict anti-hazing policies and risk management manuals precisely because they have faced numerous hazing incidents, injuries, and deaths across their chapters nationwide over decades. When a Texas chapter engages in a form of hazing (e.g., forced alcohol consumption at a “Big/Little” event) that has led to tragedy in other states (like the Stone Foltz case involving Pi Kappa Alpha at Bowling Green State University), it can demonstrate foreseeability. The national organization knew, or should have known, the dangers inherent in such activities.
• Organizational Knowledge: Courts can evaluate whether a national headquarters truly enforced its anti-hazing policies or merely treated them as “paper policies.” If a national organization has a history of minimally punishing or ignoring hazing incidents at various chapters, it strengthens the argument that they were deliberately indifferent to a known danger.
• Legal Precedents: Multi-million-dollar verdicts and settlements against national fraternities (e.g., the $10 million settlement in the Stone Foltz case involving Pi Kappa Alpha national, or the $14 million settlement paid by Beta Theta Pi for David Bogenberger’s death) establish a clear financial incentive for these organizations to prevent hazing. When similar incidents occur in Texas, these precedents guide our firm in seeking appropriate compensation and accountability.

In essence, when a local Texas chapter repeats a dangerous script that has caused harm elsewhere, it moves from being a “rogue act” to a demonstrable pattern of foreseeable misconduct for which the national organization can be held accountable.

Organization Mapping: Connecting Local Texas Chapters to National Patterns

While each campus hosts a vast array of Greek organizations, certain national fraternities and sororities have unfortunately been implicated in multiple high-profile hazing incidents across the country. Below, we synthesize some examples of these organizations and their concerning national histories that are relevant to Texas campuses like UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike): Present on campuses like UT Austin, UH, Texas A&M, and potentially others.

  • National History: Pi Kappa Alpha has a deeply troubling national history of severe hazing, particularly involving forced alcohol consumption. The tragic death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University (2021) after being forced to drink an entire bottle of alcohol is one of the most prominent, resulting in a $10 million settlement for his family. The death of David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University (2012) also involved alcohol poisoning, leading to a $14 million settlement. These patterns indicate a systemic issue with alcohol-fueled hazing within the national organization, making any similar incidents at Texas chapters highly foreseeable.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): Active at UT Austin, UH, Texas A&M, and SMU.

  • National History: SAE has faced multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries across the country, prompting the national organization to famously (and controversially) eliminate its traditional pledge process for a time. Yet, incidents persist. Beyond the tragic deaths, recent lawsuits include:
    • A traumatic brain injury suffered by a pledge at the University of Alabama (2023).
    • The chemical burns requiring skin grafts for pledges at Texas A&M (2021) after industrial cleaner was poured on them during hazing.
    • An assault case at the University of Texas at Austin (2024) involving an exchange student injured at a chapter party, though the chapter was already suspended. These incidents demonstrate SAE’s persistent national problem with various forms of dangerous hazing.

• Phi Delta Theta (Phi Delt): Chapters at UT Austin, UH, Texas A&M, SMU, and Baylor.

  • National History: The defining tragedy for Phi Delta Theta is the death of Maxwell “Max” Gruver at LSU (2017), who died from a BAC of 0.495% after being forced to participate in a “Bible study” drinking game. This incident led to Louisiana’s Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing law, and his family securing a $6.1 million verdict. This history signifies that forced drinking rituals are a known danger within the organization.

• Pi Kappa Phi (Pi Kapp): Present at UT Austin, UH, and Texas A&M.

  • National History: Pi Kappa Phi is tragically linked to the death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University (2017) from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night,” where pledges were given handles of hard liquor. This event led to prosecutions and statewide anti-hazing movements in Florida.

• Beta Theta Pi (Beta): Chapters at UT Austin, UH, Texas A&M, SMU, and Baylor.

  • National History: The 2017 death of Timothy Piazza at Penn State University is perhaps one of the most well-documented hazing tragedies in U.S. history, involving extreme alcohol consumption and a horrific delay in calling for help. This led to a landmark criminal prosecution and civil litigation, demonstrating the severe consequences of negligent supervision and a cover-up culture within the organization.

• Sigma Chi (Sig Chi): Found at UT Austin, UH, Texas A&M, and Baylor.

  • National History: Sigma Chi has faced substantial liability for hazing. In a recent high-profile case involving the College of Charleston (2024), a family received more than $10 million in damages for a pledge who alleged physical beatings, forced drug/alcohol consumption, and psychological torment. This indicates that juries are willing to award significant damages for severe hazing, highlighting a pattern within Sigma Chi nationally.

• Kappa Sigma (K-Sig): Chapters at UT Austin, UH, Texas A&M, and Baylor.

  • National History: Kappa Sigma has a historical pattern of incidents including the $12.6 million jury verdict in the death of Chad Meredith at the University of Miami (2001), who drowned after being persuaded to swim while intoxicated as part of hazing. More recently, the Texas A&M chapter (2023) has faced allegations of hazing severe enough to cause rhabdomyolysis. This consistent pattern of dangerous activities highlights a continued risk.

Even sororities, though less frequently associated with fatality, have hazing histories:

• Kappa Kappa Gamma (Kappa): Chapters at UT Austin, Texas A&M, SMU, and Baylor.
  • National History: While not known for alcohol-related deaths, incidents like the DePauw University case (1997) involving alleged branding of pledges with cigarettes after heavy drinking highlight that sororities also engage in harmful hazing.

This is not an exhaustive list but provides examples of how a national organization’s history of hazing can demonstrate foreseeability and liability when similar incidents occur at Texas chapters. Our firm ensures that these patterns are rigorously investigated and presented in any legal action.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

For Real County families considering legal action after a hazing incident at one of Texas’s major universities, understanding these national patterns is key to building a strong case.

• Foreseeability: A core legal argument is that the national organization (and often the university) should have foreseen that hazing, particularly patterns seen elsewhere, could occur at a specific chapter. Their anti-hazing policies are proof they know the dangers.
• Institutional Negligence: When a national organization, despite a clear history of dangerous incidents, fails to implement effective preventative measures, adequately train local chapters, or aggressively address prior misconduct, it strengthens claims of negligence and even gross negligence.
• Insurance Battles: As Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, understands firsthand from her background as a former insurance defense lawyer, these national patterns inform how insurance companies for fraternities and universities will approach a claim. Their attempts to deny coverage, arguing that hazing is an “intentional act” and thus excluded, can be countered by demonstrating a pattern of their insured’s negligence in failing to prevent foreseeable harm.
• Punitive Damages: When an organization has a long and documented history of similar hazing incidents but takes minimal meaningful action, it can support arguments for punitive damages, which are designed to punish egregious conduct and deter future harm.

By connecting specific Texas incidents (whether at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor) to compelling national patterns, we can establish a powerful legal narrative. This depth of investigation is crucial for maximizing accountability and seeking justice for Real County families.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Experiencing hazing or its tragic aftermath is devastating for Real County families. Pursuing a legal case may seem daunting, but with an experienced team, it becomes a structured process of investigation, evidence collection, and strategic advocacy. Our firm approaches hazing cases with the same depth and rigor we apply to complex refinery accidents or multi-million dollar wrongful death claims, because the stakes – a child’s life and future – are equally high.

Evidence: The Foundation of Any Hazing Case

Modern hazing cases are often won or lost based on the quality and comprehensiveness of the evidence. Hazers thrive on secrecy, so uncovering and preserving critical evidence is paramount.

• Digital Communications: This is often the most critical category of evidence in contemporary hazing cases.
  • Group Chats and DMs: Platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Snapchat, and fraternity-specific apps are where much of hazing is planned, executed, and documented. Messages reveal planning, intent, specific instructions, participant lists, and cover-up attempts.
  • Social Media: Instagram stories, posts, TikTok videos, and other platforms can unintentionally document hazing events, injuries, or boastful comments from participants. Even deleted content can often be recovered.
  • Preservation is Key: Screenshots must capture full threads, timestamps, and usernames. Our firm advises clients to document everything immediately, as hazers often delete messages rapidly. 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: Beyond social media, these can be immensely powerful.
  • Content Captured During Events: Fellow members or pledges may have filmed portions of the hazing.
  • Injury Documentation: High-resolution photos of any physical injuries, bruises, burns, or lacerations, taken from multiple angles and over several days to show progression. For scale, placing a coin or ruler next to the injury is helpful.
  • Locations/Objects: Photos of the venue where hazing occurred, any dangerous objects used (paddles, excessive alcohol bottles), or unhygienic conditions.
  • Security Footage: Surveillance from private residences (e.g., Ring cameras), bars, or event venues can capture arrivals, departures, or parts of incidents.
• Internal Organization Documents: These can reveal official complicity or negligence.
  • Pledge Manuals/Rituals: Often contain euphemistically named “traditions” that are, in fact, hazing.
  • Emails/Texts from Officers: Direct communications planning “new member education” activities can expose intent.
  • National Policies & Training Materials: These documents prove that national organizations are aware of hazing risks and have policies in place—the question then becomes if they were actually enforced.
• University Records: Schools often have a paper trail that can be used.
  • Prior Conduct Files: Documented instances of a chapter’s past hazing violations, probations, or suspensions (like those publicly available for UT Austin). These establish a pattern of misconduct and the university’s knowledge.
  • Incident Reports: Filed with campus police or student conduct offices.
  • Title IX Complaints/Clery Reports: Relevant if the hazing involved gender-based violence or specific crimes.
  • Internal Communications: Emails among administrators discussing concerns about an organization, potentially obtained through discovery.
• Medical and Psychological Records: Crucial for documenting the extent of harm.
  • Emergency Room & Hospitalization Records: Document immediate injuries, treatments, and toxicology results (alcohol, drugs). Crucially, the victim should tell providers how injuries occurred (e.g., “I was forced to drink by my fraternity”) to ensure proper documentation.
  • Ongoing Treatment Notes: Physical therapy, rehabilitation, specialist consultations (e.g., for brain injury or organ damage).
  • Psychological Evaluations: Diagnoses of PTSD, depression, anxiety, or other mental health impacts resulting from the trauma. These are vital for non-economic damages.
• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are critical.
  • Pledges/Members: Other new members or even active members who later come forward.
  • Former Members: Those who resigned or were expelled sometimes provide powerful testimony.
  • Bystanders: Roommates, RAs, coaches, or anyone who observed unusual behavior.

Damages: What Families Can Recover

When hazing causes injury or death, the law provides for avenues to recover damages that encompass both quantifiable financial losses and subjective, non-economic harms. For Real County families, understanding these categories is essential, though each case’s value is unique.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This includes all costs associated with the physical and mental recovery from hazing.
  • Past medical expenses (ambulance, ER, hospital stays, surgeries, medications).
  • Future medical expenses, which can be substantial for long-term physical therapy, psychological counseling, or lifelong care for catastrophic injuries like traumatic brain injury (as in the Danny Santulli case).
• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: The financial toll of hazing can extend far beyond immediate medical needs.
  • Lost wages for the student or for a parent who had to take time off to provide care.
  • Loss of educational opportunities, including missed semesters, lost scholarships, and delayed graduation, which can lead to a diminished future earning capacity.
• Non-Economic Damages: These address the profound subjective suffering that hazing inflicts.
  • Physical Pain and Suffering: From injuries, recovery, and any permanent physical impairments.
  • Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: Including diagnosed conditions like PTSD, severe depression, anxiety, panic attacks, humiliation, fear, loss of dignity, and loss of trust.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: An inability to participate in hobbies, sports, or social activities, and a general diminishment of the quality of life or the intended college experience.
• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): In the most tragic cases, when hazing results in a fatality, specific damages are available to surviving family members.
  • Funeral and burial costs.
  • Loss of financial support the deceased would have provided to the family.
  • Loss of companionship, love, guidance, and society for parents, siblings, or a spouse.
  • Grief and emotional suffering experienced by the family.
• Punitive Damages: In cases of particularly egregious, reckless, or malicious conduct (e.g., ignoring repeated warnings, deliberate cover-ups), courts may award punitive damages. These are designed to punish the defendants and deter similar harmful behavior in the future. In Texas, while punitive damages are available, there are often statutory caps, except in cases of intentional torts.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Hazing litigation often involves multiple institutional defendants, each with their own legal counsel and insurance carriers.

• Insurance Companies: National fraternities, universities, and individuals typically have insurance policies designed to cover various liabilities. However, these insurers frequently attempt to deny coverage for hazing incidents, arguing that hazing constitutes “intentional acts” or falls under specific policy exclusions.
• Experienced Hazing Lawyers: This is where the expertise of a firm like Attorney911 becomes vital, particularly with Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney. We know how to:
  • Identify All Potential Coverage: This includes national organization policies, local chapter policies, university umbrella policies, and even homeowners’ policies of individual members.
  • Challenge Exclusions: Argue that while the hazing act itself might be intentional, the failure of the national organization or university to supervise, enforce policies, or prevent known dangers was a negligent act, which is covered.
  • Force Duty to Defend: Compelling insurers to provide legal defense and coverage for their insureds.
  • Navigate Bad Faith Claims: If an insurer wrongfully denies coverage, we can pursue claims against the insurer for acting in bad faith.

The insurance aspect of hazing cases is incredibly complex, but it’s often where the accountability lies. Without the financial leverage of insurers, many institutions would simply close ranks. Our firm has the depth of knowledge to navigate these intricate insurance battles, ensuring your family’s case is taken seriously.

Practical Guides & FAQs

When hazing impacts a family, the immediate need is for clear, actionable advice. Real County families, often far removed from the complex legal landscape of institutional hazing, need to know what steps to take. We’ve compiled guides for parents, students, and witnesses, along with answers to common questions.

For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

Parents are often the first to notice subtle changes. Trust your instincts.

• Warning Signs of Hazing in Your Child:
  • Unexplained Injuries: Bruises, burns, cuts, or sprains without credible explanations; frequent “accidents.”
  • Extreme Fatigue: Constant exhaustion, sleep deprivation, falling asleep in class or at odd times.
  • Sudden Personality Changes: Increased anxiety, depression, irritability, withdrawal from family or old friends, secrecy about group activities (“I can’t talk about it”).
  • Obsessive Phone Use: Constantly checking group chats, anxiety about missing a message, receiving calls or texts at all hours demanding immediate response.
  • Academic Decline: Sudden drops in grades, missing classes, skipping assignments for “mandatory” events.
  • Financial Red Flags: Unexpected requests for money for “fines,” “gifts,” or alcohol; maxed-out credit cards; unexplained large expenses.
  • Physical Decline: Sudden weight loss or gain, poor hygiene, unhealthy eating habits.
• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach with empathy, not judgment. Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things going with [group name]? Is anything making you uncomfortable?” Emphasize that their safety and well-being are paramount, and you will support them no matter what.
• If Your Child is Hurt:
  • Prioritize Medical Care: Get them immediate medical attention. Insist that the medical provider documents how the injury occurred (e.g., “was forced to drink” or “was physically assaulted”).
  • Document Everything Thoroughly: This is critical. Photograph all injuries, save screenshots of any relevant digital communications, and make detailed notes of everything your child tells you, including names, dates, and locations.
• Dealing with the University: Communicate in writing where possible. Document every interaction, and ask specific questions about prior incidents involving the group. Never let the university pressure you into downplaying the incident.
• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child has sustained significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing the incident, contact an attorney immediately. An early consultation can protect your child’s rights and preserve crucial evidence.

For Students / Pledges: Self-Assessment & Safety Planning

If you are a student from Real County, or anywhere in Texas, and you are questioning your experience, you’re likely right to do so.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Ask yourself: Are you being forced or pressured to do things you don’t want to? Would you do this if no one was watching, or if there were no social consequences? Is the activity dangerous, degrading, or illegal? Are you being told to keep secrets or lie? If you answer yes to any of these, it’s hazing. Tradition should not involve trauma.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: The intense desire to belong, fear of exclusion, and the power dynamic between new members and older members means that “consent” is rarely truly voluntary in hazing. Texas law explicitly states consent is not a defense to hazing. You are a victim, not a willing participant, in an illegal act.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the right to leave any organization at any time. If you fear retaliation, notify a trusted adult (like a parent, RA, or resident director) or the Dean of Students. If you are in immediate danger, call 911. You can often report anonymously through university channels or the National Anti-Hazing Hotline: 1-888-NOT-HAZE (1-888-668-4293).
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: In Texas, many schools and state laws offer some form of amnesty or good-faith reporter protection. This means if you call for help in a medical emergency (even if underage drinking or other violations were involved), you and your friends may avoid disciplinary action. Your life is more valuable than any party.

For Former Members / Witnesses: A Path to Accountability

If you were once involved in hazing, or witnessed it, and now grapple with guilt or fear, know this: your courage to speak out can save lives and prevent future tragedies.

• Your Role in Accountability: Your testimony and any evidence you possess could be pivotal in stopping harmful hazing practices and holding responsible parties accountable. While confronting past actions is difficult, coming forward can prevent others from suffering the same fate.
• Seek Your Own Legal Counsel: If you have concerns about your own legal exposure, an attorney can advise you on your rights, potential protections if you cooperate, and help you navigate the process without jeopardizing your future. They can also represent you as a witness.

Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Hazing Case

For Real County families facing the trauma of hazing, the actions taken immediately after an incident are critical. Unfortunately, in the confusion and distress, common mistakes can inadvertently undermine a potential legal case. Watch Attorney911’s video on client mistakes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY

1. Allowing Deleted Messages or Evidence to Vanish:
   • Wrong Thinking: “I don’t want my child to get in more trouble if those messages show them participating.”
   • Why it’s Wrong: Hazers are quick to delete evidence. Allowing this makes it almost impossible to prove what happened. It can also appear as a cover-up.
   • What to Do: Immediately preserve ALL digital evidence (screenshots of chats, social media, photos, videos), even if it’s embarrassing. Nothing should be deleted.
2. Directly Confronting the Organization or Its Members:
   • Wrong Thinking: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
   • Why it’s Wrong: This alerts the perpetrators, allowing them ample time to coordinate stories, destroy evidence, and coach witnesses. It can also escalate the situation and put your child at risk.
   • What to Do: Document everything privately, then immediately contact a lawyer before any confrontation.
3. Signing University “Releases” or “Resolution Agreements”:
   • Wrong Thinking: “The university wants to resolve this quickly, and I want an end to the nightmare.”
   • Why it’s Wrong: You may unknowingly waive your legal right to pursue further action, including filing a lawsuit. Settlements offered by universities internally are often far below the true value of the case and don’t provide real accountability.
   • What to Do: Never sign anything from the university or any insurance company without an experienced attorney reviewing it first.
4. Posting Details on Public Social Media:
   • Wrong Thinking: “I want the world to know what happened to my child.”
   • Why it’s Wrong: Defense attorneys will screenshot every post. Inconsistencies, even minor ones, can damage credibility. Public posts can also inadvertently waive legal privileges.
   • What to Do: Maintain strict privacy. If you want a public message, work with your attorney to craft a statement that protects your legal interests.
5. Letting Your Child Return for “One Last Meeting”:
   • Wrong Thinking: “The fraternity wants to hear my child’s side or apologize.”
   • Why it’s Wrong: This is often a tactic to pressure the victim, gather information, or extract statements that can be used against them later. It puts your child back into a potentially coercive environment.
   • What to Do: Once you are considering legal action, all communication from the organization or university should be directed through your attorney.
6. Waiting to See How the University Handles It:
   • Wrong Thinking: “I trust the university to investigate fairly and enforce its rules.”
   • Why it’s Wrong: Universities have their own interests, which may not align with your child’s. Evidence disappears rapidly, witnesses graduate, and the statute of limitations continues to run. University disciplinary processes often result in minimal consequences for the perpetrators and no compensation for the victim.
   • What to Do: Secure immediate legal counsel while simultaneously cooperating with university investigations. Preserve all evidence yourself; do not rely solely on the university to do so.
7. Speaking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer:
   • Wrong Thinking: “They just need my statement to process the claim and pay for damages.”
   • Why it’s Wrong: Insurance adjusters represent the insurance company, not your interests. Recorded statements are often used to find inconsistencies or undermine your claim. Early settlement offers are typically lowball.
   • What to Do: Politely decline to speak with any adjuster and advise them that your attorney will contact them directly.

Short Hazing FAQs for Real County Families

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT enjoy some sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, Title IX violations, or when suing individuals in their personal capacity. Private universities (SMU, Baylor) have fewer immunity protections. Every case hinges on its specific facts; contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.
• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It certainly can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default. However, it escalates to a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or results in death. Individual officers who knowingly fail to report hazing can also face misdemeanor charges.
• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to join the organization?”
  Absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. The law recognizes that true, voluntary consent is impossible under conditions of peer pressure, coercion, and the desire to belong.
• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”
  Generally, there is a 2-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death in Texas. However, the “discovery rule” can 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 graduate, and memories fade. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to protect your rights. Our video, “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c), explains this crucial deadline.
• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of the hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national organizations can still be held accountable based on their sponsorship, knowledge, control, and the foreseeability of the hazing. Many major hazing cases (like the Pi Delta Psi retreat death in Pennsylvania or the Sigma Pi death at an unofficial house) occurred off-campus and still resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments against both the organization and individuals.
• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  Most hazing cases settle confidentially before ever going to trial. Our firm prioritizes your family’s privacy and works to secure sealed court records and confidential settlement terms when appropriate. Our goal is accountability and justice, balancing your family’s needs with appropriate public awareness.

About The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911 + Call to Action

When your family in Real County faces the devastation of a hazing incident, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who intimately understand the subtle and sometimes overt ways powerful institutions fight back—and how to overcome them. You need the Legal Emergency Lawyers™ of Attorney911.

At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, we bring a powerful combination of experience, insight, and unwavering dedication to hazing cases. From our primary office in Houston, and with additional offices in Austin and Beaumont, we serve families throughout Texas, including those from Camp Wood, Leakey, and across Real County. We understand that hazing at Texas universities can affect anyone, regardless of where they call home.

Our unique qualifications for handling complex hazing litigation include:

• Insurance Insider Advantage (Lupe Peña): Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), previously worked as an insurance defense attorney at a national firm. This experience means she knows exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies operate, how they value (or undervalue) hazing claims, and their common delay and denial tactics. We know their playbook because we used to run it. This insider knowledge is invaluable when navigating complex insurance coverage disputes common in hazing cases.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions (Ralph Manginello): Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/), has a quarter-century of experience in high-stakes, complex litigation. He was one of the few Texas attorneys involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, taking on a multi-billion-dollar corporation. His extensive federal court experience (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) means we are not intimidated by national fraternities, powerful universities, or their well-resourced defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won significant victories.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: Our firm has a proven track record of securing multi-million dollar settlements and verdicts in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/). We collaborate with top economists and medical experts to accurately value a life lost or the lifetime care needs for victims with permanent disabilities, such as traumatic brain injuries. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that compel accountability and justice.
• Criminal and Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the prestigious Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) gives our firm critical insight into how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/). This dual perspective allows us to advise witnesses and former members who may face criminal exposure while also pursuing a civil claim.
• Unmatched Investigative Depth: We leverage a vast network of experts, including digital forensics specialists, medical professionals, economists, and psychologists. Our experience in complex industrial accident cases means we know how to uncover hidden evidence—from deleted group chats and social media to national fraternity records and university files obtained through subpoenas and public records requests. We investigate as though your child’s life depends on it, because in many hazing scenarios, it literally does.

We understand that you are navigating one of the hardest experiences a family can face. Our job is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and help ensure that what happened to your child doesn’t happen to another. We prioritize thorough investigation and true accountability over quick settlements.

If your child, a student from Real County, or any part of Texas, has been affected by hazing at a Texas campus – whether it’s UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor, or another institution – we want to hear from you. Families in Leakey, Camp Wood, and throughout Real County have the right to answers, accountability, and justice.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911 for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We will listen to what happened, explain your legal options clearly, and help you decide the best path forward for your family. There’s no pressure to hire us on the spot; we simply offer honest, expert guidance.

In your free, confidential consultation, you can expect us to:

• Listen to your story with empathy and without judgment.
• Review any evidence you have (photos, texts, medical records).
• Explain your legal options, including criminal reports, civil lawsuits, or both.
• Discuss realistic timelines and what to expect from the legal process.
• Answer your questions about costs – we work on a contingency fee basis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc), meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case.
• Ensure everything you tell us remains strictly confidential.

Call us today to secure the legal support your family deserves.

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

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

Whether you’re in Real County, Uvalde County, Bandera County, or anywhere across our great state of Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone. Call us today.

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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