In Robertson County, our fraternity & sorority hazing lawyers at Attorney911 — Legal Emergency Lawyers™ offer specialized representation. With a former insurance defense attorney on staff, we understand fraternity insurance tactics. Our federal court experience includes taking on national fraternities and universities, evidenced by our success in BP Explosion Litigation. We bring HCCLA criminal defense and civil wrongful death expertise to every case, securing multi-million dollar proven results. We handle hazing cases from institutions like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, specializing in evidence preservation. With 25+ years experience, we offer a free consultation and contingency fee: no win, no fee. Hablamos Español. Call 1-888-ATTY-911.

When sunrise paints the East Texas skies, families across Robertson County begin another day, sending their children off to school, work, or university. For many, the dream of higher education includes growth, community, and opportunity. Yet, beneath the vibrant surface of campus life at acclaimed institutions like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, there’s a dark undercurrent that can turn dreams into nightmares: hazing.

Imagine a student from Franklin, Hearne, Mumford, or Calvert – right here in Robertson County – eager to embrace college life. They join a fraternity, sorority, athletic team, or even a spirit organization with hopes of finding belonging and mentorship. Then comes an “initiation night.” Pressured to consume staggering amounts of alcohol, forced into physically abusive scenarios, or subjected to degrading acts while others film and chant. Someone collapses, turns unresponsive, or gets seriously hurt. A terrifying choice emerges: call for help and risk “getting the chapter shut down,” or stay silent and let a fellow student suffer. The student, caught between loyalty and fear, feels utterly trapped.

This isn’t a sensationalized movie scene; it’s a tragic reality that has played out on campuses across Texas and the nation. Even if your child attends school miles away from Navasota River or the quiet communities of Robertson County, the dangers of hazing are universal, and the legal frameworks are designed to protect students no matter where they pursue their education.

This guide is for you – families and students in Robertson County and across Texas – who seek to understand the complex world of hazing. We explore:

• What hazing truly entails in 2025, moving beyond outdated stereotypes.
• The intricate landscape of Texas and federal laws that address hazing.
• The critical lessons from national hazing tragedies and how they inform cases here in Texas.
• Specific instances and patterns of hazing at prominent Texas universities: the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor University.
• The legal recourse available to victims and families, emphasizing accountability and prevention.

While this article provides vital general information, it is not a substitute for specific legal advice. Every hazing incident is unique, and its particular facts dictate the potential legal avenues. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, we serve families throughout Texas, including those in Robertson County, bringing our deep experience to bear on these sensitive and complex cases.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

• If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

  • Call 911 for medical emergencies, prioritizing their health above all else.
  • Then call Attorney911: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911) for immediate legal guidance. We provide immediate help – that’s why we’re the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

• In the first 48 hours, every action counts:

  • Secure medical attention without delay, even if the student downplays their symptoms.
  • Preserve evidence BEFORE it vanishes. This means immediately screenshotting group chats, texts, and direct messages. Photograph any injuries from multiple angles and save any physical items like damaged clothing, receipts for forced purchases, or objects used in the hazing.
  • Write down everything while your memory is fresh: who was involved, what exactly happened, when, and where.
  • Crucial DON’Ts: Do NOT confront the fraternity or sorority directly. Do NOT sign any documents from the university or an insurance company without legal review. Do NOT post details on public social media, as this can compromise a future legal case. Do NOT allow your child to delete messages or “clean up” any evidence.

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

  • Evidence disappears rapidly, as group chats are often deleted, physical items disposed of, and witnesses coached. Universities may also move quickly to control the narrative.
  • We can help families in Robertson County and throughout Texas preserve critical evidence and protect your child’s rights from the outset.
  • Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For many in Robertson County, the image of hazing might be something out of a vintage movie – perhaps a playful prank or a harmless rite of passage. However, modern hazing is far more insidious, encompassing a wide range of behaviors that jeopardize physical safety, mental health, and academic success. It’s an escalating spectrum of coercion, humiliation, and abuse that demands our serious attention.

Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

At its core, hazing refers to any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action connected to joining, maintaining membership, or gaining status within any group whose members include students. This behavior inherently endangers mental or physical health, humiliates, or exploits. It’s critical to understand that saying “I agreed to it” does not automatically make an activity safe or legal, especially when there’s a clear power imbalance and intense peer pressure involved.

Main Categories of Hazing

Today’s hazing tactics are sophisticated, adaptable, and often masked by euphemisms like “team-building” or “tradition.” We categorize them broadly:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is arguably the most dangerous and tragically common form of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking of alcohol, often to dangerous levels, through activities like chugging challenges, “lineups,” or “games” requiring rapid, excessive consumption. Students may also be pressured to consume unknown or mixed substances, leading to severe intoxication, poisoning, or death.

• Physical Hazing: Beyond the well-known paddling and beatings, physical hazing includes extreme calisthenics, prolonged “workouts,” or “smokings” designed to push pledges beyond safe physical limits, often until exhaustion or injury. Sleep deprivation, food or water deprivation, and intentional exposure to extreme cold, heat, or other dangerous environments are also common. These activities can directly lead to injuries like rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown), internal organ damage, and falls.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This particularly egregious form of hazing includes forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts, or degrading positions such as the “roasted pig.” Making individuals wear embarrassing costumes, or participating in acts with racist, sexist, or homophobic overtones, including slurs or role-play, is also a part of this category, causing deep psychological wounds and feelings of shame.

• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but profoundly damaging, psychological hazing involves sustained verbal abuse, threats, and deliberate social isolation. Manipulation, forced confessions, and public shaming—whether in person, on social media, or in meetings—can severely impact a student’s mental health, leading to anxiety, depression, and even suicidal ideation.

• Digital/Online Hazing: This modern evolution leverages technology to extend hazing into every aspect of a student’s life. It includes group chat dares, “challenges,” and public humiliation via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and Discord. Students are pressured to create or share compromising images and videos, respond to commands at all hours, and are often subjected to constant monitoring, eroding their sense of privacy and control.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

The popular image of hazing might focus solely on fraternities, but the reality for Robertson County families is that hazing permeates a wide array of student organizations. It’s born out of power dynamics, tradition, and a flawed sense of “earning” membership, leading to these dangerous practices being kept alive even when everyone knows they are illegal.

Beyond fraternities and sororities (including Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations), hazing incidents have been documented in:

• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: These groups, especially prominent at institutions like Texas A&M, often embrace a tradition-heavy, military-style environment where the line between discipline and hazing can become dangerously blurred, sometimes leading to severe abuse.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs: Organizations that carry a university’s spirit or distinct traditions, such as the Texas Cowboys at UT Austin, have also faced disciplinary action for hazing.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to baseball, track, and cheerleading squads, hazing is not uncommon. These incidents often involve forced drinking, physical abuse, or sexually degrading rituals under the guise of “team bonding” or “toughening up.”
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even organizations dedicated to arts and culture are not immune. Hazing in these groups can involve physical endurance challenges, sleep deprivation, or public humiliation as a form of initiation.
• Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: While less common than in Greek life or athletics, some professional or cultural student groups have also engaged in hazing, highlighting the pervasive nature of power dynamics in student organizations.

Understanding the breadth and depth of modern hazing is the first step toward prevention and accountability. For families in Robertson County, recognizing the signs and knowing where to turn for help is crucial, regardless of whether their child is involved in Greek life, sports, or other campus activities.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

When hazing impacts a family in Robertson County, understanding the legal framework is essential. Both Texas state law and emerging federal regulations provide avenues for accountability, offering mechanisms for criminal prosecution and civil recourse.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has clear, specific anti-hazing provisions primarily housed within the Texas Education Code, designed to protect students. In plain terms, Texas law broadly defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act carried out by one person, or with others, against a student. This act must be for the purpose of initiating, affiliating with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in an organization whose members include students. Crucially, the act must either:

• Endanger the mental or physical health or safety of a student (e.g., severe beating, forced and excessive consumption of alcohol or drugs, extreme physical exertion to the point of injury, or deprivation of sleep or food).
• Substantially affect the mental health or safety of a student (e.g., extreme humiliation, intimidation that causes lasting psychological distress, or prolonged isolation).

This definition is expansive, covering actions both on and off campus, and includes both physical and psychological harm. Importantly, Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Even if a student outwardly “agreed” to participate, the law recognizes that true consent is often impossible within a coercive environment defined by peer pressure, fear of exclusion, and a desire to belong.

Criminal Penalties: Hazing in Texas carries significant criminal penalties:

• By default, hazing that does not result in serious injury is classified as a Class B Misdemeanor, potentially leading to up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• If the hazing causes an injury requiring medical treatment, it can be elevated to a Class A Misdemeanor.
• Most severely, if hazing results in serious bodily injury or death, it can be prosecuted as a State Jail Felony, carrying more stringent penalties.

Furthermore, Texas law also criminalizes the failure to report hazing (for those who knew about it and were members or officers of the organization), and retaliation against anyone who reports hazing, both as misdemeanors. This aims to break the “code of silence” that often surrounds hazing incidents.

It’s important to remember that this is a summary. The actual Texas Education Code contains precise legal definitions and procedures. However, the intent is clear: to criminalize dangerous initiation practices and hold individuals and organizations accountable.

Criminal vs Civil Cases

Families in Robertson County dealing with hazing often encounter two distinct, yet sometimes overlapping, legal processes:

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated and pursued by the state, represented by a prosecutor, on behalf of the public interest. The primary goal of a criminal case is to punish individuals for violating public laws. In hazing contexts, typical criminal charges can include:

  • Specific hazing offenses (misdemeanor or felony depending on the severity).
  • Furnishing alcohol to minors.
  • Assault, battery, or even more serious charges like involuntary manslaughter in cases of death.
  • If a student is found guilty, consequences can range from fines and probation to jail time.

• Civil Cases: These are brought directly by victims or their surviving family members (plaintiffs) against those they believe are responsible for the harm (defendants). The main objective of a civil case is to secure monetary compensation for damages suffered and to hold responsible parties accountable. Civil lawsuits stemming from hazing often focus on:

  • Negligence and Gross Negligence: Alleging that individuals, organizations, or universities failed in their duty of care or acted with reckless disregard for safety.
  • Wrongful Death: If hazing leads to a fatality, family members can sue for the loss of their loved one.
  • Negligent Hiring/Supervision: If a university or organization failed to properly vet or oversee employees, advisors, or student leaders.
  • 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.
  • Assault and Battery: Direct claims for physical abuse.

A critical point for families in Robertson County to understand is that a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for pursuing a civil case. Even if criminal charges are not filed or do not result in a conviction, a civil lawsuit can still proceed if there is evidence of negligence or other civil wrongs. The evidentiary standards differ between criminal (beyond a reasonable doubt) and civil (preponderance of the evidence) cases, meaning a civil case can sometimes succeed where a criminal case does not. Both types of cases can run concurrently, but their aims and outcomes are distinct.

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

While state law primarily governs hazing incidents, federal regulations are increasingly shaping how universities—including those attended by students from Robertson County—address and report hazing.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation mandates that colleges and universities receiving federal funding (which includes most institutions) must:

  • Report hazing incidents and findings transparently: This will lead to a more public and accessible record of hazing violations and disciplinary actions, phased in by approximately 2026.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention efforts: Requiring schools to implement more robust programs to combat hazing.
  • Maintain public hazing data: Enabling prospective students and their families to make more informed decisions by understanding the hazing history of organizations and institutions.

• Title IX / Clery Act: These existing federal statutes can also play a role when hazing occurs:

  • Title IX: Prohibits sex-based discrimination in education. If hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based hostility, or disproportionately impacts students based on gender, Title IX obligations are triggered. This can compel universities to investigate, take corrective action, and provide support, regardless of whether state hazing laws are directly violated.
  • Clery Act: Requires colleges and universities to report campus crime statistics and to have emergency response plans. Hazing incidents often involve underlying crimes such as assault, alcohol/drug violations, or sexual offenses, which fall under Clery reporting requirements. This means universities must disclose data that can shine a light on campus safety concerns related to hazing.

These federal layers provide students and families with additional avenues for redress and push universities toward greater transparency and proactive prevention.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

One of the complexities of hazing cases for families in Robertson County often involves identifying all the parties who may be legally responsible. Liability can extend far beyond the immediate perpetrators:

• Individual Students: Those who actively planned, encouraged, supplied alcohol, carried out the hazing acts, or participated in attempts to cover them up, can be held personally liable for their actions.
• Local Chapter / Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself can be sued if it is legally recognized or if its officers were acting in an official capacity. This includes student leaders who oversaw or facilitated hazing.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: The larger, national organization that charters local chapters often bears significant liability. This is particularly true if the national headquarters received dues, set policies, appointed advisors, or had prior knowledge of hazing patterns (either at the local chapter or other chapters nationwide) but failed to adequately intervene, enforce policies, or prevent similar incidents.
• University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself, including its administration, athletic department, or board of regents, may be held liable under various negligence theories. Key questions include whether the university failed to adequately supervise student organizations, ignored prior warnings, or was deliberately indifferent to known hazing risks. Public universities in Texas (like UH, Texas A&M, UT) may assert sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist, especially for gross negligence or Title IX violations.
• Third Parties: Liability can also extend to others, such as:
  • Landlords/Property Owners: If hazing occurred at an off-campus house where the landlord knew or should have known about dangerous activities.
  • Bars or Alcohol Providers: Under Texas dram shop laws, establishments that overserve visibly intoxicated individuals or serve minors who then cause harm can be held liable.
  • Security Companies or Event Organizers: If their negligence contributed to an unsafe environment where hazing occurred.

Each hazing case is fact-specific, and the liable parties will vary depending on the unique circumstances and the specific harms caused. A thorough investigation is crucial to identify all potentially responsible entities and ensure maximum accountability.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragic stories of hazing victims nationwide serve as powerful reminders of the devastating consequences when dangerous rituals are allowed to flourish. These landmark cases illustrate repeating patterns of abuse, institutional failures, and the significant legal and financial repercussions that can follow. For families in Robertson County, these national precedents set crucial benchmarks for understanding liability and accountability in Texas.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Excessive forced alcohol consumption remains the leading cause of hazing fatalities, with repeating scenarios that highlight systemic failures.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (February 2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after a “bid acceptance” night where he was forced to consume extreme amounts of alcohol. Fraternity security cameras captured his agonizing falls and subsequent injuries, yet members delayed calling for medical help for nearly 12 hours, fearing repercussions for their chapter. The incident led to an unprecedented number of criminal charges against fraternity members, civil litigation against the fraternity and individuals, and spurred Pennsylvania to enact the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law, one of the toughest in the nation. This case showed how extreme intoxication, a deliberate delay in calling 911, and a pervasive culture of silence can lead to devastating and legally indefensible outcomes.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (November 2017): Andrew Coffey, 20, died of alcohol poisoning after a “Big Brother Night” in which pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them rapidly. The incident resulted in multiple criminal hazing charges against fraternity members and prompted Florida State University to temporarily suspend all Greek life, leading to significant policy overhauls. This case tragically underscored how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster at campuses nationwide, often disregarding state laws and national anti-hazing policies.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (September 2017): Max Gruver, 18, died after a forced “Bible study” drinking game where pledges were made to take swigs of high-proof alcohol for every incorrect answer to questions about fraternity history. His blood alcohol content was 0.495%, a lethal level. The tragedy led to multiple members being charged, one with negligent homicide, and prompted Louisiana to pass the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute designed to hold individuals more accountable. This case powerfully demonstrated how legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of systematic hazing practices.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (March 2021): Stone Foltz, 20, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” night. Multiple fraternity members were convicted of hazing-related offenses. The Foltz family secured a $10 million settlement in 2023, with $7 million from the Pi Kappa Alpha national fraternity and approximately $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This case emphasized that not only can individuals and national fraternities face severe financial penalties, but universities can also bear significant financial and reputational consequences for their role in failing to prevent hazing.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physical and ritualistic hazing can lead to severe injuries and death, illustrating another dangerous pattern.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (December 2013): Chun “Michael” Deng, 19, died after being subjected to a brutal, blindfolded “glass ceiling” ritual at a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania. He was repeatedly tackled while carrying a heavy backpack. Fraternity members delayed calling 911 for hours, instead attempting a cover-up. Multiple members were convicted, and the national fraternity itself was found criminally liable for aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter – a landmark decision. The fraternity was ultimately banned from operating in Pennsylvania for 10 years. This case highlighted that off-campus “retreats” are often chosen precisely to evade detection and can be as dangerous or even more dangerous than on-campus incidents, and that national organizations are not immune from criminal prosecution.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing’s reach extends well beyond Greek life, with high-profile incidents occurring within university athletic programs, demonstrating institutional failures in different contexts.

• Northwestern University Football Hazing Scandal (2023–2025): In 2023, former football players came forward alleging widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the Northwestern football program spanning multiple years. The claims included forced sexual acts, degrading rituals, and specific instances of abuse. This scandal led to the firing of highly successful head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed a wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university, which was confidentially settled in August 2025. Multiple players also filed lawsuits against Northwestern and its coaching staff. This case served as a stark reminder that hazing is not confined to Greek life; even prestigious, big-money athletic programs can harbor systemic abuse and institutional failures, raising serious questions about oversight and accountability.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies reveal common threads that echo across campuses, including those attended by students from Bryan-College Station, Waco, Austin, Dallas, and Houston. The patterns are clear: forced drinking, physical abuse, psychological torment, humiliation, a code of silence, delayed or denied medical care, and systematic cover-ups.

For families in Robertson County, these cases offer critical insights. They demonstrate that:

• Reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements often follow only after tragedy and persistent litigation, underscoring the legal system’s role in compelling change.
• The precedents set in these national cases can be directly applied in Texas courts, helping to prove foreseeability, establish a pattern of misconduct, and bolster claims against negligent individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and universities.
• Families facing the nightmare of hazing at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, Southern Methodist University, or Baylor University are not alone, and they are operating within a legal landscape profoundly shaped by these national lessons of accountability.

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

For families in Robertson County, sending students to any major Texas university comes with hopes for a brighter future. Yet, these institutions, despite their academic excellence and vibrant campus cultures, are not immune to the pervasive problem of hazing. We regularly speak with parents and students from communities like Franklin, Hearne, and Calvert whose lives are impacted by incidents at these schools. We understand the logistical challenges, too, of navigating large university systems from afar.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a dynamic urban campus situated within the sprawling Houston metropolis, serves as a hub for students from all over Texas, including many from Robertson County seeking opportunities in a major city. Greek life at UH is incredibly active, encompassing a diverse array of fraternities and sororities, alongside numerous student organizations and sports clubs.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH’s vibrant atmosphere, with its mix of commuter and residential students, offers a rich array of social and academic opportunities. Its proximity to Houston’s economic centers makes it an attractive choice. However, the diverse and active campus life, including a robust Greek system with IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, and multicultural Greek chapters, also presents an environment where hazing can, unfortunately, occur.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston has a clear, no-tolerance stance against hazing, whether it occurs on or off campus. Their policy, consistent with Texas state law, prohibits any act that causes or is likely to cause mental or physical discomfort, intimidation, or ridicule for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. This includes forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and activities causing significant mental distress. Students and parents are encouraged to report hazing through the UH Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD), or through anonymous online reporting forms linked on the university’s website. UH, like other Texas universities, also posts general statements regarding hazing and sometimes provides summaries of disciplinary actions taken, though detailed public listings of violations are less comprehensive compared to some other institutions.

5.1.3 Example Incident & Response

One notable incident involved the Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) fraternity in 2016. Pledges allegedly faced strenuous hazing, including sleep deprivation and being forced to eat large amounts of spicy food. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen following an event where he was slammed onto a table or similar surface. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was subsequently suspended by the university, highlighting UH’s willingness to take action against fraternities that violate anti-hazing policies. While not always publicly detailed, UH routinely investigates and disciplines organizations for behavior deemed “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” including instances of alcohol misuse and other policy infractions that fall under the umbrella of hazing. These disciplinary measures include suspensions and probations, signaling the university’s ongoing efforts, even if challenges persist in preventing all incidents.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Robertson County family pursuing a hazing case originating at UH, the legal process would likely involve various agencies. Depending on the nature and location of the incident, investigations could be conducted by UHPD and/or the Houston Police Department (HPD). Civil lawsuits stemming from hazing at UH would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. Potential defendants would include the individual students involved, the local fraternity or sorority chapter, the national organization (which may reside outside Texas), and potentially the University of Houston itself, along with any property owners where the hazing occurred. Our Houston-based firm, Attorney911, has significant experience navigating the Harris County court system and has a deep understanding of local legal landscapes.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

• Familiarize yourself with UH’s reporting channels: Use the Dean of Students office, UHPD, or online reporting forms provided on the university website.
• Document everything: If you suspect hazing, compile all possible evidence including screenshots of group chats, photos of injuries, and notes detailing incidents. Our firm’s video, “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs), offers practical tips.
• Consult with an attorney experienced in Houston-based hazing cases: A lawyer can help families from Robertson County navigate the complex UH disciplinary process and uncover prior disciplinary actions against the organization, which can be crucial for building a civil case.
• Do not delay seeking medical attention: Prioritize the student’s health regardless of concerns about “getting into trouble.” Good-faith reporting protections exist.
• Understand institutional responsibilities: UH, like other universities, has a duty to provide a safe environment. An experienced attorney can assess if the university failed in this duty.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a proud institution nestled in Bryan-College Station, holds a unique place in the hearts of many Texans, including those from Robertson County. Its strong traditions, including the revered Corps of Cadets, and a thriving Greek life attract students from across the state and nation. Students from communities like Franklin often choose A&M for its rich legacy and academic rigor.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Famed for its “Aggie Spirit” and deep-seated traditions, Texas A&M’s campus culture is robust and often intense. The university is home to a significant Greek community, with IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, and Multicultural Greek Council organizations. The Corps of Cadets, a military-style ROTC program, is a foundational element of A&M, known for its strict discipline and brotherhood. While these elements foster strong bonds, they also create environments where power dynamics and “tradition” can dangerously morph into hazing.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M maintains a stringent anti-hazing policy, strictly prohibiting any action or activity that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of membership or affiliation. This policy applies to all student organizations, including Greek life, athletic teams, and the Corps of Cadets, and extends to both on-campus and off-campus activities. Reporting channels include the Dean of Student Life, the Texas A&M University Police Department (TAMU PD), and the Office of Student Conduct. The university also emphasizes anonymous reporting options to encourage students to come forward without fear.

5.2.3 Example Incidents & Response

Texas A&M has faced multiple high-profile hazing allegations across Greek life and the Corps:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit (around 2021): Two pledges alleged severe hazing by the SAE fraternity. They claimed they were forced into strenuous physical activity and had various substances poured on them, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in severe chemical burns that required extensive medical treatment, including skin graft surgeries. The fraternity chapter was suspended by the university, and the pledges subsequently filed a $1 million lawsuit against SAE. This incident highlights the extreme physical danger hazing can involve and the substantial financial claims victims can pursue.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging degrading and abusive hazing during his time in the Corps. His claims included simulated sexual acts and being bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The cadet sought over $1 million in damages, arguing the Corps leadership failed to prevent the long-standing hazing culture. Texas A&M responded by stating that such matters were handled under its internal regulations, further underscoring the challenges of achieving external accountability in institutions with strong internal structures.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Robertson County families seeking justice for hazing at Texas A&M, local authorities like TAMU PD and Bryan/College Station Police Departments might be involved in initial criminal investigations. Civil lawsuits would generally be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Brazos County. Due to its status as a public university, Texas A&M may invoke sovereign immunity, which can present hurdles. However, as demonstrated in other public university cases nationally (like Bowling Green State University’s settlement), exceptions related to gross negligence, willful misconduct, or Title IX violations can overcome such defenses. When dealing with the Corps of Cadets, the complex hierarchy and entrenched traditions require an understanding of how to navigate military-style structures in a civil context.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

• Understand A&M’s specific culture: Be aware of the strong emphasis on tradition, particularly within the Corps, and where those traditions might cross into hazing.
• Report through official channels: Utilize the Dean of Student Life for hazing reports, or TAMU PD for criminal acts. Remember that both internal and external reporting can be pursued with legal guidance.
• Collect meticulous evidence: Documenting incidents with photos, screenshots of “Fish Camp” or other group chats, and witness contacts is vital. Our firm’s video “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) is a valuable resource.
• Seek legal counsel early: Especially given the university’s large, protective nature and the sovereign immunity defense, consulting an experienced hazing attorney as soon as possible after an incident in the Bryan-College Station area is crucial.
• Don’t mistake “tradition” for legality: Many hazing acts are disguised as time-honored traditions, but if they endanger health or safety, they are illegal and actionable.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin, the flagship institution of the Texas university system, is a magnet for top students statewide, including many talented individuals from Robertson County. Its vibrant Greek life, numerous spirit organizations, and fiercely competitive academic and athletic programs make it a dynamic and high-stakes environment where hazing incidents, unfortunately, are not uncommon.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin sits at the heart of a bustling urban center, known for its intense academic and social scene. Greek life is a dominant force, with a large number of fraternities and sororities (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, Texas Asian Pan-Hellenic Council, and other multicultural orgs) actively recruiting. Beyond Greek life, spirit groups like the Texas Cowboys and various athletic teams also contribute significantly to the campus identity. This dynamic environment, while fostering strong community, also creates conditions where ambition, desire for status, and “tradition” can sadly lead to hazing.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UT Austin maintains a robust anti-hazing policy rooted in state law, prohibiting any act on or off campus, by an individual or group, that causes or is likely to cause mental or physical discomfort, intimidation, or ridicule for the purpose of affiliation or initiation. UT distinguishes itself by its transparency, publicly listing hazing violations on its website under “Hazing Violations.” This commitment to public record is a significant tool for accountability. Students and parents can report hazing via the Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD), or through an anonymous online reporting system.

5.3.3 Example Incident & Response

UT Austin’s public Hazing Violations page (hazing.utexas.edu) provides a telling record of ongoing challenges:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) (2023): The UT chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha faced disciplinary action when new members were reportedly forced to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics. These activities were found to constitute hazing. As a result, the chapter was placed on probation and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education programs. This incident mirrors the national patterns seen with Pike, underscoring that specific fraternities often have recurring issues across different campuses.
• Texas Wranglers (Spirit Organization): Various non-Greek groups like spirit organizations have also faced sanctions. The Texas Wranglers, an influential spirit group, has encountered disciplinary actions for hazing over the years, involving practices such as forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, or other punishment-based initiations that were deemed to endanger student well-being.

UT’s public listing approach, while not exhaustive, provides a critical resource for families. It shows that even with such transparency, repeated violations demonstrate the deeply entrenched nature of hazing within certain organizations. This public data can become powerful evidence in civil litigation, demonstrating a pattern of neglect or deliberate indifference when organizations repeatedly violate policies.

5.3.4 How a UT Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Robertson County family pursuing a hazing case from UT Austin, local law enforcement agencies such as UTPD and the Austin Police Department would be relevant for criminal investigations. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Austin and Travis County. As a public university, UT Austin may assert sovereign immunity, similar to Texas A&M and UH. However, the university’s detailed public record of hazing incidents could be used to argue foreseeability and a pattern of alleged negligence in civil actions, potentially overcoming immunity defenses. The ability to subpoena these public records, and often other internal communications, makes UT’s transparency a double-edged sword for the institution in court.

5.3.5 What UT Students & Parents Should Do

• Review UT’s Hazing Violations page: Before joining an organization, check the university’s public record of disciplinary actions at hazing.utexas.edu. This can offer crucial insights into an organization’s history.
• Report immediately and confidentially: Students should use the UT Dean of Students, UTPD, or anonymous channels if they experience or witness hazing. For serious incidents, contacting Attorney911 for confidential advice at 1-888-ATTY-911 is recommended.
• Understand the power of evidence: Given UT’s proactive approach to documenting, meticulous personal evidence collection (screenshots, photos, witness lists) aligns with the university’s own emphasis on facts and patterns.
• Recognize the weight of academic pressure: For many UT students, the desire to succeed academically and socially can make resisting hazing difficult. Parents from Robertson County should reinforce that their child’s safety and well-being always come first.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, nestled in the affluent Park Cities area of Dallas, attracts students from across Texas, including Robertson County families looking for a private university experience. SMU’s reputation for academic excellence, a vibrant social scene, and a strong Greek life makes it a highly desirable, yet sometimes challenging, environment.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is characterized by its beautiful campus, rigorous academics, and a generally affluent student body. Greek life plays an exceptionally prominent role in the social fabric of the university, with a significant percentage of students participating in Panhellenic and IFC fraternities and sororities, as well as NPHC and multicultural Greek organizations. The intense social pressure and emphasis on tradition in these groups, paired with a desire for belonging, can unfortunately create fertile ground for hazing incidents to occur.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU maintains clear policies prohibiting hazing, defining it as any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of affiliation with or initiation into an organization. This policy applies to all student groups, whether the activities take place on or off campus. SMU encourages reporting through its Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards, the SMU Police Department (SMU PD), and various anonymous reporting systems, including platforms like Speak Up SMU. The university emphasizes prevention education and disciplinary action for violations.

5.4.3 Example Incident & Response

SMU has had its share of hazing incidents, highlighting the persistent nature of the problem even at private institutions:

• Kappa Alpha Order (KA) Incident (2017): This high-profile incident involved allegations that new members of the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity were subjected to physical hazing, including paddling, forced consumption of large amounts of alcohol, and sleep deprivation. The university launched an investigation, which resulted in the suspension of the KA chapter, with severe restrictions on its ability to recruit new members for several years (until around 2021). This case demonstrated SMU’s willingness to take strong disciplinary action when hazing allegations are substantiated, even against prominent Greek organizations.

These incidents, often documented through internal university reports rather than publicly accessible databases (as is more common with private universities), underscore the challenges families can face in gathering information. However, they consistently point to underlying issues of unchecked power, alcohol abuse, and initiation rituals that cross the line into dangerous hazing.

5.2.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Robertson County family pursuing a hazing case from SMU, criminal investigations could involve SMU PD and/or the Dallas Police Department. Civil lawsuits against SMU would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Dallas County. As a private university, SMU does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it potentially more directly liable in negligence lawsuits compared to public institutions. However, private universities often employ aggressive legal teams to defend against such claims and may seek to keep internal information confidential. Our Houston-based and Texas-wide firm understands how to navigate the Dallas County legal system and compel discovery from private institutions.

5.2.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

• Be aware of the private university context: While SMU has anti-hazing policies and reporting mechanisms, the transparency of investigations may differ from public universities like UT. Legal counsel can assist in compelling information through discovery.
• Report early and discreetly: Utilize SMU’s reporting channels (Office of Student Conduct, SMU PD, anonymous systems). For sensitive situations, consulting Attorney911 for confidential advice at 1-888-ATTY-911 can help strategize the best approach to reporting without jeopardizing a future legal claim.
• Focus on detailed documentation: Given the potential for less public information, meticulous personal documentation by students and parents (capturing group chats, photos, witness accounts) becomes even more critical for building a case.
• Understand the social pressures of Greek life: Recognize that intense social pressure to conform within SMU’s prominent Greek culture can make it difficult for students to resist hazing or report it. Reinforce that safety and well-being are paramount.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Baptist university in Waco, holds a unique position among Texas institutions. It draws many students from places like Robertson County for its strong academics, faith-based mission, and spirited campus life. However, Baylor has also faced significant scrutiny over major institutional failings in the past, which brings an additional layer of complexity to hazing and student safety concerns.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor’s campus culture is distinct, blending its Christian mission with a robust athletic program and active student life, including Greek organizations (Panhellenic, IFC, and NPHC). The university fosters a strong sense of community and adherence to its values. However, its history of controversy, particularly regarding its handling of sexual assault allegations and institutional oversight, means that any claims of student misconduct or abuse, including hazing, are viewed through a lens of heightened scrutiny and demands for accountability.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing in any form, detailing its definition and disciplinary processes in its student conduct policies. These policies align with Texas state law, stating that hazing involves any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of membership. Reporting channels include the Baylor Department of Student Conduct, the Baylor Police Department (BUPD), and an online reporting form. The university emphasizes its “zero tolerance” for hazing and provides educational resources.

5.5.3 Example Incident & Response

Baylor has had multiple incidents involving hazing, including at a high-profile level:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): A significant incident involved the Baylor baseball team. Following an investigation into hazing allegations, 14 baseball players were suspended. The university announced staggered suspensions for these players over the early part of the baseball season, underscoring disciplinary action against athletes. While specific details of the hazing were not fully publicized, the incident demonstrated that hazing can occur within athletic programs at Baylor, a university that has already been under intense public scrutiny regarding student welfare.

This incident, coming in the wake of Baylor’s earlier sexual assault scandal, demonstrates the university’s ongoing challenges in ensuring a safe and accountable environment for all students. It highlights that official statements of “zero tolerance” must be consistently backed by rigorous enforcement and transparent accountability to prevent recurring misconduct.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Robertson County family pursuing a hazing case at Baylor, criminal investigations could involve BUPD and/or the Waco Police Department. Civil lawsuits against Baylor University would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over McLennan County. As a private university, Baylor does not have sovereign immunity. However, its past experiences with litigation mean it has robust legal defense strategies in place. The broader context of Baylor’s prior institutional failures can influence a civil case, potentially supporting arguments about a pattern of inadequate oversight or failures to protect students.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

• Be aware of Baylor’s institutional context: Understand that Baylor’s history of managing student welfare claims can influence how hazing allegations are handled and litigated.
• Document all communications: Keep meticulous records of all interactions with Baylor administration, especially if you are reporting hazing.
• Seek legal advice early: Given the complexities of private university litigation and Baylor’s specific institutional history, consulting an experienced hazing attorney as soon as possible after an incident is particularly important.
• Prioritize safety over status: Emphasize to students that their physical and mental health are more important than remaining in any organization, regardless of its prestige or perceived benefits for a post-college career.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For students from Robertson County looking to join Greek life at Texas universities, the decision often comes with a promise of camaraderie, networking, and social engagement. However, these organizations, active at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, are part of a larger national system that frequently carries a troubling history of hazing. Understanding this connection is vital for assessing risk and pursuing accountability.

Why National Histories Matter

The fraternities and sororities operating on Texas campuses are typically local chapters of much larger, national organizations. These national headquarters (HQs) play a crucial role in setting policies, collecting dues, and providing oversight—or failing to do so. The sheer number of anti-hazing manuals and risk management policies developed by national organizations is, in itself, a testament to a tragic reality: they have witnessed, often repeatedly, deaths and catastrophic injuries at their various chapters across the country. They know the patterns: the “Big/Little” drinking nights, the “Bible study” games, the forced calisthenics, and the humiliating rituals.

When a local chapter at a Texas university (be it the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor) repeats a hazing script that has already led to injury, death, or lawsuits at another chapter in another state, it creates a powerful legal argument of foreseeability. It demonstrates that the national organization had prior notice of the dangerous nature of these “traditions.” This record of national incidents can critically support claims of negligence or even gross negligence against national fraternities or sororities, paving the way for punitive damages depending on the jurisdiction and claims.

Organization Mapping

While space prevents an exhaustive list of every single Greek chapter and its full history, several national fraternities and sororities consistently appear in hazing incidents across the country and on Texas campuses:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor. Pike has a particularly tragic national history of severe hazing, primarily involving forced and excessive alcohol consumption during “Big/Little” events or similar initiation rituals. The Stone Foltz death at Bowling Green State University (2021), resulting in a $10 million settlement, and the David Bogenberger death at Northern Illinois University (2012), with a $14 million settlement, are just two prominent examples. These cases establish a clear pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing that national Pike leadership was, and should have been, acutely aware of. When a chapter at UH or UT Austin repeats this pattern, it strengthens the argument that the national organization failed in its duty to curb this known danger.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): Present at UH, Texas A&M, and SMU. SAE has a well-documented national history of hazing-related deaths and severe injuries, often associated with alcohol hazing or physical abuse. After a series of fatalities, SAE national dramatically (though controversially) eliminated its pledge process in 2014, a clear acknowledgment of systemic issues. Despite this, incidents persist, as evidenced by a recent traumatic brain injury lawsuit (filed 2023) against an SAE chapter at the University of Alabama, a $1 million lawsuit regarding chemical burns at Texas A&M (around 2021), and an assault lawsuit against the UT Austin chapter (2024). These cases across different campuses underline a recurring pattern of severe misconduct, demonstrating foreseeability for the national organization.

• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor. Phi Delta Theta’s name is tragically synonymous with the Max Gruver hazing death at Louisiana State University (2017), where a “Bible study” drinking game led to a fatal blood alcohol content. This incident spurred Louisiana’s felony hazing statute. Such a high-profile tragedy places a heavy burden on the national organization to prevent similar incidents, making new hazing incidents at Texas chapters particularly damning in discussions of national negligence.

• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, and UT. Pi Kappa Phi gained national attention with the Andrew Coffey hazing death at Florida State University (2017), another case involving forced alcohol consumption during a “Big Brother Night.” The national organization’s awareness of this type of event, especially given the tragic outcome, establishes a clear expectation for preventing such hazardous “traditions” in its other chapters.

• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU. Beta Theta Pi’s history is inextricably linked to the Timothy Piazza hazing death at Penn State University (2017). The horrific details of Piazza’s prolonged suffering and the delayed medical attention, captured on security cameras, provided irrefutable evidence of grotesque negligence and criminal conduct. This nationally recognized case significantly elevated the standard of care expected from national fraternities, universities, and individual members regarding hazing prevention and response.

• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU. Sigma Chi has also faced significant hazing allegations, including a recent $10 million+ settlement in a College of Charleston case (2024) for physical beatings, forced substance consumption, and psychological torment. Such a substantial payout demonstrates that juries will award significant damages for severe hazing, underscoring the risks the national organization faces from recurring incidents.

• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor. Kappa Sigma was held liable in the landmark Chad Meredith drowning death case at the University of Miami (2001), which resulted in a $12.6 million jury verdict. This case was instrumental in making hazing a criminal offense in Florida. More recently, allegations of severe injuries (rhabdomyolysis from extreme physical hazing) at the Texas A&M chapter (2023) indicate ongoing concerns for the national organization.

It’s important to note that hazing is not exclusive to fraternities; sororities, while statistically less prone to physical injury, have their own histories of psychological and subtle hazing that can be equally damaging. Chapters of NPHC (Divine Nine) and multicultural Greek organizations, despite often having strong community ties, are not exempt from hazing risks, particularly physical paddling or demanding rituals.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

For families in Robertson County and across Texas, understanding this national history is not just about awareness; it’s a critical component of legal strategy:

• Pattern of Malice or Negligence: The repeated occurrence of similar hazing incidents across different chapters nationwide demonstrates a pattern. This pattern can be used to argue that certain organizations, at the national level, had adequate warnings of dangerous practices but consistently failed to intervene effectively.
• Foreseeability: When a specific type of hazing (e.g., forced alcohol consumption) has led to injury or death at one chapter, the argument that the national organization “couldn’t have foreseen” it happening at another is significantly weakened. This is crucial for establishing negligence.
• Settlement Leverage and Insurance Coverage: A history of national incidents strengthens a plaintiff’s position in settlement negotiations. It also impacts insurance coverage disputes, making it harder for national organizations or their insurers to argue that an incident was “unforeseeable” or excluded under policies for “intentional acts.”
• Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, where a national organization has a long record of ignoring warnings or failing to enforce policies, a court may consider awarding punitive damages. These damages, beyond compensating the victim, are designed to punish the defendant for reckless or malicious conduct and deter similar behavior in the future.

The experienced hazing attorneys at The Manginello Law Firm know how to meticulously connect these national incidents to the local context at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor, using the full weight of legal precedent to hold accountable those who continually put students’ lives at risk.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Navigating a hazing lawsuit requires a deep understanding of legal principles, a relentless pursuit of evidence, and a strategic approach honed by experience. For families in Robertson County whose children have been harmed on a Texas campus, building a strong case is essential to achieving accountability and securing justice.

7.1 Evidence

In the digital age, evidence in hazing cases is both abundant and fleeting. Our firm specializes in uncovering and preserving the critical pieces of information that prove what happened:

• Digital Communications: These are often the most crucial pieces of evidence. We meticulously collect:

  • GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, and Slack: Text messages and chat logs on these platforms reveal planning, commands, coercion, cover-up attempts, and participant lists. Our firm’s video, “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs), explains exactly how to screenshot and preserve these.
  • Instagram DMs, Snapchat, and TikTok: Messages, vanishing stories, videos, and comments can capture real-time hazing, humiliation, or directives. We know how to work with digital forensics experts to recover even seemingly deleted content.
  • Fraternity/Sorority-specific Apps or Platforms: Many organizations use proprietary apps or private social networks that contain critical information.

• Photos & Videos: These can be damning. We seek:

  • Content filmed by members: Often shared in group chats or private social media to document “successes” or “challenges.”
  • Publicly shared footage: Videos or photos posted on social media that, while seemingly innocent, can hide clues to hazing.
  • Security camera footage: From houses, campus facilities, or adjacent businesses, which can show who was present, what was carried in, or the condition of participants.

• Internal Organization Documents: Subpoenas can uncover a trove of information:

  • Pledge manuals, initiation scripts, and “traditions” lists: These often reveal official or unofficial hazing protocols.
  • Emails/texts from officers: Communications regarding “new member education” or directions for hazing activities.
  • National policies and training materials: To demonstrate what the national organization knew or should have known, and whether their policies were genuinely enforced.

• University Records: These are vital for establishing a pattern of negligence:

  • Prior conduct files: Records of previous hazing violations, probations, or suspensions for the same organization or individuals.
  • Incident reports: To campus police or student conduct offices, revealing patterns of complaints or concerning behavior.
  • Clery reports and similar disclosures: Publicly available data on campus safety and reported crimes.

• Medical and Psychological Records: These document the extent of the harm:

  • Emergency room and hospitalization records: Detailing injuries, blood alcohol levels, toxicology reports, and initial diagnoses.
  • Surgery, rehab, and therapy notes: Showing ongoing treatment and recovery.
  • Psychological evaluations: Diagnosing conditions like PTSD, depression, or anxiety, which are critical for proving non-economic damages.

• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts bolster the physical evidence:

  • Other pledges, members, roommates, coaches, trainers, and bystanders: Those willing to speak out can provide critical context and corroborate events.
  • Former members: Individuals who quit or were expelled, often due to disillusionment with hazing, can provide powerful testimony about the culture.

Effective evidence collection in a hazing case is proactive, aggressive, and often requires forensic expertise to recover deleted or hidden data.

7.2 Damages

When hazing results in injury or death, the legal system aims to compensate victims and their families for a wide range of losses, known as “damages.” We emphasize to families in Robertson County that while no amount of money can truly replace what’s lost, it can provide necessary resources for healing and accountability.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This includes all costs associated with physical recovery:

  • Emergency room visits, ambulance transport, and immediate hospitalization.
  • Surgeries, ongoing treatments, physical therapy, and prescription medications.
  • For catastrophic injuries like brain damage (such as in the Danny Santulli case), this can include lifetime care plans, requiring substantial financial resources.

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

  • Missed semesters, forced withdrawals, or delayed graduation can result in lost educational opportunities.
  • If an injury is permanent, it can diminish future earning capacity, requiring expert economists to calculate potential lifetime income loss.

• Non-Economic Damages: These address the intangible but profound harms:

  • Physical Pain and Suffering: From enduring injuries and their ongoing effects.
  • Emotional Distress, Trauma, and Humiliation: Including diagnoses like PTSD, severe depression, anxiety, and the deep psychological impact of degrading acts. Documentation from counselors and therapists is crucial here.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: An inability to participate in hobbies, sports, or social activities, and the overall reduced quality of life due to the hazing.

• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): If hazing leads to a fatality, surviving family members can pursue claims for:

  • Funeral and burial costs.
  • Loss of financial support the deceased would have provided.
  • Loss of companionship, love, guidance, and society for parents, spouses, and children.
  • The emotional pain and suffering (grief) experienced by the surviving family.

While we highlight these damage categories, we never promise or predict specific dollar amounts. The value of a case depends on many factors, and our role is to explain how each type of damage applies to your family’s specific situation. Attorney911’s video, “How Much Is My Personal Injury Case Worth?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onBzdkIWadY), provides further general insight.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

A significant difference in hazing litigation compared to other personal injury cases is the number of potential defendants and the complexities of insurance coverage.

• Multiple Defendants: As discussed, liability can extend to individual students, local chapters, national organizations, universities (public or private), and third-party property owners. Each defendant brings its own legal team and defensive posture.
• Insurance Coverage Fights: National fraternities, universities, and individual property owners often carry significant insurance policies. However, insurers frequently try to deny coverage by arguing that hazing, especially when it involves intentional acts or criminal behavior, falls under policy exclusions.
  • These exclusions might state that “intentional torts” or “criminal acts” are not covered. Insurers will often attempt to brand all hazing as such to avoid paying.
  • Experienced hazing lawyers (like Lupe Peña, whose background as a former insurance defense attorney for a national firm provides our firm with unique “insider” knowledge, detailed at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) know how to navigate these disputes. We argue that while the hazing act might be intentional, the national organization or university’s failure to supervise or to enforce policies is generally a negligent act, which is covered. This strategic distinction is often the key to unlocking significant compensation.
  • Identifying all potential sources of insurance (e.g., local chapter policies, national umbrella policies, homeowner’s policies of individuals) is crucial for maximizing recovery.

Bringing a hazing case to justice requires not only proving what happened but also strategically identifying all responsible parties and compelling their insurers to cover the damages. This is a complex undertaking that demands specialized legal expertise.

Practical Guides & FAQs

For families in Robertson County, facing a potential hazing incident can be overwhelming. Knowing what to do, what your rights are, and how to protect your child or yourself is paramount. This section offers practical, actionable advice.

8.1 For Parents

Parents in Franklin, Hearne, Mumford, or Calvert sending their children to Texas universities should remain vigilant. Here’s a guide to recognizing and responding to hazing:

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

  • Unexplained Injuries: Bruises, burns, cuts, or repeated “accidents” with inconsistent stories.
  • Extreme Fatigue: Sudden, profound exhaustion, or extreme sleep deprivation, often from late-night “mandatory” events.
  • Mood Changes: Drastic shifts in personality, increased anxiety, irritability, depression, or emotional withdrawal.
  • Secrecy: An abnormal level of secrecy about organization activities (“I can’t talk about it,” “It’s a secret”).
  • Constant Phone Use: Obsessive monitoring of group chats, anxiety when the phone rings or pings, fear of missing a “mandatory” communication.
  • Diminished Interest: Loss of interest in academics, hobbies, or friendships outside the organization.
  • Financial Strain: Asking for unusual amounts of money, or unexplained expenses beyond typical dues.

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

  • Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with [organization]?” or “Is there anything that makes you uncomfortable or that you wish you didn’t have to do?”
  • Emphasize their safety and well-being above any loyalty to a group. Reassure them that you will support them regardless of what they say.

• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize their health and document everything:

  • Seek Medical Care Immediately: Do not delay. Call 911 if necessary.
  • Document Everything Meticulously: Take clear photos of injuries from multiple angles and over several days. Screenshot any relevant texts, group chats, or social media posts your child shows you. Write down what your child tells you (dates, times, names, locations) while it’s fresh.
  • Save Evidence: Preserve physical items like clothing worn during an event, or receipts for coerced purchases.

• Dealing with the University:

  • Document every communication you have with university administrators.
  • Specifically ask about prior incidents involving the same organization and what the school’s response was. This information can be crucial for assessing the university’s accountability.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: Contact an experienced hazing attorney:

  • If your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm.
  • If you feel the university or organization is minimizing or attempting to conceal what happened.
  • If you’re unsure of your rights or need guidance on documenting an incident.

8.2 For Students / Pledges

If you’re a student at a Texas university, perhaps from Robertson County, unsure if what you’re experiencing is hazing, or feeling trapped, know that you have rights and options.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Ask yourself:

  • Am I being forced or pressured to do something I don’t want to do, or that makes me unsafe or uncomfortable?
  • Would I do this activity if I truly had a choice, with no social consequences or fear of exclusion?
  • Is this dangerous, degrading, embarrassing, or illegal?
  • Would older members be doing this if the university or their parents were watching?
  • Am I being told to keep secrets or lie to outsiders?
    If you answer yes to any of these, it’s very likely hazing, regardless of how it’s labeled.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that “consent is not a defense to hazing.” The law recognizes that in environments with vast power imbalances, like pledge classes, “consent” is often coerced or given under duress. You should never be blamed for being hazed.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely:

  • If you feel unsafe, you have the right to leave at any time. Your safety is paramount.
  • Consider confiding in a trusted parent, non-member friend, or RA first.
  • You can report anonymously through campus hotlines or the National Anti-Hazing Hotline (1-888-NOT-HAZE).
  • If you’re ready to leave the organization, inform the chapter president or new member educator in writing (email or text) that you are resigning. Avoid “one last meeting” if you fear pressure or intimidation.

• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Texas law and many university policies encourage students to call for help in medical emergencies, even if alcohol or drugs are involved. You generally will not be criminally prosecuted for seeking help in good faith, and schools offer amnesty from university disciplinary action related to incidental policy violations. Your life, or the life of a friend, is worth more than any potential trouble.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were a part of an organization that engaged in hazing, or you witnessed it, you may carry a heavy burden of guilt or fear of consequences. Know that your decision to come forward can prevent immense suffering and save lives.

• Your Role in Accountability: Your testimony and any evidence you possess can be vital in preventing future harm and holding negligent individuals or institutions responsible.
• Seeking Legal Advice: You may want to consult with your own attorney to understand your rights, potential liabilities, and how to navigate cooperating with investigations or lawsuits. Lawyers can help protect you while you help uncover the truth.
• Breaking the Cycle: Contributing to accountability can be a powerful step toward personal healing and ensuring that tragic hazing patterns are finally broken.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For families in Robertson County navigating the aftermath of hazing, the road to justice is often fraught with pitfalls designed to undermine a case. Avoiding these common mistakes is critical to protecting your rights and preserving potential claims.

MISTAKES THAT CAN RUIN YOUR HAZING CASE:

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

   • What parents might think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble, or for embarrassing things to come out.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Deleting evidence can be seen as a cover-up, weaken credibility, and in some instances, even lead to obstruction charges. Digital forensics can often recover deleted messages, but original screenshots are best. The absence of crucial messages can make proving a case nearly impossible.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, no matter how embarrassing or seemingly irrelevant it seems. Our firm’s video, “Client Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Injury Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY), further emphasizes this point.

2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly.

   • What parents might think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Direct confrontation will almost certainly alert the organization’s leadership. They will immediately “lawyer up,” instruct witnesses to remain silent, destroy evidence, and prepare their defenses. This effectively seals off crucial information and can be used against you.
   • What to do instead: Document everything, then contact an experienced hazing lawyer before any direct confrontation. Let your legal team handle communications.

3. Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms without legal review.

   • What universities sometimes do: Pressure families to sign waivers, non-disclosure agreements, or internal resolution documents, often portraying them as the only path to a quick solution.
   • Why it’s wrong: These documents frequently include clauses that waive your right to pursue a lawsuit or preclude you from ever speaking about the incident. Settlements offered by universities in these internal processes are often far below the true value of the case and prioritize the institution’s reputation over the victim’s long-term needs.
   • What to do instead: Never sign anything from the university or an insurance company without an attorney reviewing it first.

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

   • What families might think: “I want everyone to know what happened and warn others.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Anything posted online can and will be used by defense attorneys. Inconsistencies between public statements and legal testimony can severely damage credibility. Public posts can also unintentionally waive your right to privacy or legal privilege.
   • What to do instead: Document privately. Allow your lawyer to control public messaging and strategy if public statements become part of the case.

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

   • What fraternities/sororities might say: “Just come talk to us before you do anything drastic; let’s resolve this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: These sessions are often designed to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can be used against your child. They are rarely genuine opportunities for fair resolution once a serious incident has occurred.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communications with the organization should cease and be directed through your attorney.

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

   • What universities often promise: “We’re investigating, and we’ll handle this internally to protect your child.”
   • Why it’s wrong: While internal investigations occur, evidence disappears rapidly, witnesses graduate and become harder to contact, and the statute of limitations continues to run. Universities often prioritize their reputation and legal exposure over a victim’s full compensation or true accountability, and their internal processes often fall short of real justice.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence immediately and consult a lawyer. The university’s disciplinary process is separate from, and often insufficient for, achieving true civil accountability.

7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer.

   • What adjusters might 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. Any recorded statement can be used against you, and early settlement offers are almost always lowball, designed to resolve the claim for minimal cost before the full extent of damages is known.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and refer them to your attorney. Attorney911’s video, “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c), stresses the importance of timely consultation, while our video “How Do Contingency Fees Work?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc) addresses the cost of legal representation.

8.5 Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under specific circumstances. Public universities like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, and UT Austin benefit from some sovereign immunity. However, exceptions exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, and violations of federal laws like Title IX. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case hinges on its unique facts; contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It can be. While basic hazing is a Class B misdemeanor, it elevates to a state jail felony under Texas law if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals, including officers of organizations, can also face criminal charges for failing to report hazing if they knew about it.

• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
  Absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. The law recognizes that “consent” given under duress, peer pressure, or fear of exclusion is not genuine voluntary consent. Your child cannot “agree” to be hazed under Texas law.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  Generally, there’s a two-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death in Texas for personal injury and wrongful death cases. However, exceptions like the “discovery rule” (if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately apparent) or “tolling” for minors can extend this period. Time is always critical in these cases due to disappearing evidence and witness memory. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to discuss the specific timeline for your situation.

• “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 responsible based on factors like sponsorship, control over the organization, knowledge of off-campus activities, and foreseeability of harm. Many landmark hazing cases, such as the Pi Delta Psi retreat case, involved incidents that occurred at off-campus or private locations, and still resulted in significant legal judgments.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  While we cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality in all public legal processes, many hazing cases, particularly those involving sensitive personal details, are resolved through confidential settlements before going to trial. Our firm can work to request sealed court records and negotiate confidentiality clauses as part of any settlement, prioritizing your family’s privacy interests while pursuing accountability.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing incident, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who intimately understand how powerful institutions—national fraternities, wealthy universities, and their aggressive defense teams—fight back, and possess the strategic insight and experience to win anyway. For families in Robertson County and throughout Texas, The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, stands ready as your Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

As a Houston-based Texas personal injury firm, we bring deep experience in serious injury, wrongful death, and institutional accountability cases. We understand that hazing at Texas universities affects families far beyond the campus, reaching into communities like Franklin, Hearne, and Calvert in Robertson County.

Our firm offers unique qualifications for hazing litigation:

• Insurance Insider Advantage (Lupe Peña): Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, leverages her background as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm (learn more at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/). She knows exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims, including their delay tactics, coverage exclusion arguments, and settlement strategies. We know their playbook because we used to run it, providing an unparalleled edge for our clients.

• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions (Ralph Manginello): Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, has a proven track record in complex litigation, including being one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation. His extensive federal court experience (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) means our team is not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their formidable defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won. We know how to fight powerful defendants and secure justice.

• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have a proven track record in complex wrongful death cases, working with economists to meticulously value loss of life and collaborating with medical experts to determine lifetime care needs for brain injury or permanent disability cases. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force genuine accountability.

• Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the prestigious Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides a unique understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual perspective allows us to advise witnesses and former members with potential dual civil and criminal exposure, guiding them through complex legal intersections.

• Investigative Depth: We operate with relentless investigative rigor. This includes a network of experts—medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists—to uncover, preserve, and present even the most challenging evidence. From obtaining deleted group chats to subpoenaing national fraternity records and unearthing university files, we investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

We understand how fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments actually work, often behind closed doors. We know how to investigate modern hazing, balance victim privacy with public accountability, and how to prove coercion within secretive cultures. Most importantly, we approach every case with empathy and a profound commitment to victim advocacy. We know this is one of the hardest things a family can face, and our job is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family.

Contact Attorney911 for a Confidential Consultation

If you or your child has experienced hazing at any Texas campus – be it the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor – we want to hear from you. Families in Robertson County and throughout the surrounding region, including Franklin, Hearne, Mumford, and Calvert, have the right to answers and accountability.

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

In your free consultation, you can expect:

• A compassionate ear from attorneys who understand these sensitive cases.
• A review of any evidence you have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• A clear explanation of your legal options: whether to pursue a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• An honest discussion about realistic timelines and what to expect from the legal process.
• Answers to your questions about legal costs, as we operate on a contingency fee basis – we don’t get paid unless we win your case. (Our video “How Do Contingency Fees Work?” at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc explains this further.)
• No pressure to hire us on the spot. Take the time you need to make an informed decision.
• Everything you tell us is confidential, even if you choose not to hire our firm.

Don’t wait. Evidence disappears quickly, and memories fade. Protect your child’s rights and honor their experience.

Call Attorney911 today:
Toll-Free: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
Houston Direct: (713) 528-9070
Cell (24/7): (713) 443-4781

Visit Our Website: https://attorney911.com
Email Ralph Manginello: ralph@atty911.com

Hablamos Español: If you prefer to consult in Spanish, please contact Lupe Peña directly at lupe@atty911.com. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

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

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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