Hazing Kills: A Comprehensive Guide to Texas Hazing Laws, Cases, and Accountability for City of Stafford Families

A call comes in after midnight. Your child, a student at a Texas university, is in the emergency room. They passed out after a “pledge event” that involved forced drinking. The doctors say their blood alcohol content was dangerously high, and they’re lucky to be alive. Meanwhile, their fraternity brothers are already circling, deleting group chat messages, and coordinating a story. This scenario isn’t a distant nightmare; it’s a stark reality for too many families in Texas, including those right here in City of Stafford.

If your family calls Fort Bend County home, and your child attends or plans to attend one of Texas’ universities, the threat of hazing is real. Whether they’re cheering for the Cougars at the University of Houston, proud Aggies at Texas A&M, Longhorns at UT Austin, Mustangs at SMU, or Bears at Baylor, they could encounter the dangerous practices that are deeply embedded in some campus organizations.

This guide is for you: the parents, students, and community members in City of Stafford, Sugar Land, Missouri City, Richmond, Rosenberg, and across Fort Bend County and the broader Greater Houston area, who need to understand the complex landscape of hazing. We will cover:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, far beyond mere horseplay.
• The Texas and federal laws designed to combat hazing and hold institutions accountable.
• The lessons learned from major national hazing tragedies and how they apply to Texas families.
• The specific challenges and histories of hazing at leading Texas universities, including the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University.
• The legal options available to victims and their families in City of Stafford and across the Lone Star State.

This article provides general information. It is not specific legal advice. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC (Attorney911) can evaluate individual cases based on their unique facts. We serve families throughout Texas, including City of Stafford, Fort Bend County, and communities across the Greater Houston metropolitan area.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

In the first 48 hours, time is critical. Evidence disappears fast.

• Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.” Prioritize their health and safety.
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages immediately, especially on platforms like GroupMe, Snapchat, or Instagram.
  • Photograph injuries from multiple angles and over several days to show progression.
  • Save physical items like specific clothing, receipts, or any objects involved in the hazing.
• Write down everything while memory is fresh: who was involved, what happened, when, and where.
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity/sorority or alleged perpetrators directly.
  • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal review.
  • Post details on public social media, as this can compromise your case.
  • Let your child delete messages or “clean up” any evidence.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours: Evidence disappears, university narratives solidify, and crucial legal deadlines begin ticking. We can help preserve evidence and protect your child’s rights. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for an immediate, confidential consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For City of Stafford families, it’s crucial to discard outdated notions of hazing as harmless pranks or simple rites of passage. In 2025, hazing is a sophisticated, dangerous, and often deeply psychological form of abuse that can lead to catastrophic injury, permanent trauma, or death. It has evolved, making it harder to detect and easier for perpetrators to evade accountability.

Hazing is any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student for the purpose of pledging, initiation, affiliation, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students. Crucially, this act must endanger the mental or physical health or safety of the student. If someone makes you do something dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they meant to do it or were reckless about the risk, that is hazing under Texas law. The idea that “I agreed to it” does not automatically make these activities safe or legal, especially when peer pressure and power imbalances are at play.

Main Categories of Modern Hazing

Today’s hazing tactics are diverse and often hidden from plain sight, making them particularly insidious.

Alcohol and Substance Hazing

This remains the most common and deadliest form of hazing. It involves forcing or coercing individuals to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol or other substances. This can manifest as:

• Forced drinking games: “Lineups,” “Big/Little” reveal nights, or trivia games tied to rapid alcohol consumption.
• Excessive consumption: Pledges compelled to finish entire bottles of liquor, perform keg stands, or chug alcoholic mixtures.
• Substance abuse: Pressure to consume unknown or illicit substances.

Physical Hazing

Often disguised as “building brotherhood/sisterhood” or “character development,” physical hazing involves acts that cause bodily harm or extreme discomfort.

• Beatings and paddling: From traditional paddling to punches, kicks, or slaps.
• Extreme physical exertion: Prolonged calisthenics, “workouts,” drills, or “smokings” that go far beyond healthy limits, leading to exhaustion, rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown), or injury.
• Deprivation: Prolonged sleep, food, or water deprivation.
• Environmental exposure: Forcing new members into extreme cold or heat, or dangerous locations.

Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing

These acts are designed to degrade, shame, and psychologically harm new members, often with sexual connotations.

• Forced nudity: Requiring partial or full nudity.
• Simulated sexual acts: Forcing individuals to perform or simulate sexual acts, often in highly degrading contexts (e.g., “roasted pig” positions, “elephant walks”).
• Degrading costumes or acts: Compelling members to wear humiliating attire or perform embarrassing public stunts.
• Discrimination: Hazing acts with racist, sexist, homophobic, or other discriminatory overtones, including slurs or role-playing stereotypes.

Psychological Hazing

Psychological hazing strips away an individual’s sense of self-worth and autonomy, fostering dependence and fear.

• Verbal abuse: Constant yelling, insults, degrading language, and threats.
• Isolation: Preventing new members from communicating with outside friends, family, or non-hazing participants.
• Manipulation: Coercing false confessions or demanding unquestioning loyalty through emotional blackmail.
• Public shaming: Forced humiliating acts in front of peers, or posting embarrassing content online.

Digital and Online Hazing

With the rise of smartphones and social media, hazing has moved into the digital realm, enabling 24/7 control and surveillance.

• Group chat coercion: Mandatory participation in group chats, with constant demands, instant responses required, and punishments for non-compliance.
• Social media humiliation: Forcing pledges to create embarrassing content on TikTok, Instagram, or Snapchat, or to post degrading messages.
• Cyberstalking/tracking: Using location-sharing apps (like Find My Friends or Life360) to monitor pledges’ movements, or harassing them online if they don’t comply.
• Evidence destruction: Coercing pledges to delete damning photos, videos, or messages from their devices and cloud storage.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not confined to one type of organization or campus. The pursuit of group identity, tradition, and perceived status can lead to abusive practices in a wide range of collegiate groups:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes social Greek letter organizations (IFC, Panhellenic), National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) “Divine Nine” groups, and multicultural Greek councils (MGC). Hazing in these groups is often intense during pledging or new member education.
• College Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming and cheerleading, athletic programs frequently have hazing rituals, some of which feature physical abuse or sexualized acts.
• Military Organizations: The Corps of Cadets (e.g., at Texas A&M) and ROTC programs, despite their official military values, can sometimes harbor hazing hidden under the guise of “training” or “discipline.”
• Spirit Groups and Tradition Clubs: Organizations focused on school spirit or specific traditions (like the Texas Cowboys at UT Austin or various “spirit organizations”) can be hotbeds of hazing.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign organizations can have power dynamics that lead to hazing.
• Service, Cultural, and Academic Groups: Any group with an “initiation” or “new member” process is susceptible to hazing. Cultural groups have, in some instances, been found to engage in hazing that leverages ethnic background or tradition in harmful ways.

The common threads are social status, power imbalances, and intense pressure to conform. These factors keep dangerous practices alive, even when everyone “knows” hazing is illegal and explicitly forbidden by university policies.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape is crucial for City of Stafford families seeking justice for hazing. Texas law provides specific protections, and broader federal regulations can also play a role.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

In Texas, hazing is not just a campus policy violation; it’s a crime. The Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F, specifically addresses hazing, aiming to prevent it and hold perpetrators accountable.

Texas law defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed by a student (alone or with others) directed against another student, that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of that student, for the purpose of initiation, affiliation, or membership in a student organization.

What does this mean in plain terms for City of Stafford families? If your child is pressured into an activity to join a campus group, and that activity is dangerous, harmful, or degrading – even if they “agreed” to it – it constitutes hazing under Texas law. The law doesn’t require malicious intent; “reckless” behavior (meaning the perpetrator knew or should have known the risks but proceeded anyway) is sufficient.

Criminal Penalties

The severity of criminal penalties for hazing in Texas depends largely on the outcome:

• Class B Misdemeanor: Hazing that does not result in serious bodily injury is generally a Class B misdemeanor, carrying potential penalties of up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury requiring medical attention, it can be elevated to a Class A misdemeanor.
• State Jail Felony: Critically, if hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it becomes a state jail felony, which can result in imprisonment for 180 days to two years and fines of up to $10,000.

Additionally, Texas law also makes it a misdemeanor to:

• Fail to Report Hazing: If a student or organization officer knew about hazing and failed to report it, they could face charges.
• Retaliate Against a Reporter: Any retaliation against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor.

Organizational Liability

Student organizations themselves (fraternities, sororities, clubs, teams) can also be criminally prosecuted. An organization may be held liable if it:

• Authorized or encouraged the hazing.
• Had an officer or member acting in an official capacity who knew about the hazing and failed to report it.
  Penalties for organizations can include fines up to $10,000 per violation and, crucially, the university can revoke recognition, effectively banning the organization from campus.

Immunity for Good-Faith Reporting

Texas law offers protection for those who come forward. A person acting in good faith who reports a hazing incident to university authorities or law enforcement is immune from civil or criminal liability that might result from that report. This provision is designed to encourage bystanders and victims to report without fear of getting into trouble themselves, which is a common concern.

Consent Not a Defense

One of the most important aspects for families in City of Stafford to understand is that consent is explicitly not a defense to prosecution for hazing in Texas (Texas Education Code § 37.155). This directly addresses the common defense by hazing perpetrators that “they wanted to do it.” The law recognizes that true voluntary consent is compromised by peer pressure, power imbalances, and the desire to belong.

Reporting by Educational Institutions

Texas colleges and universities are mandated to proactively combat hazing. They must:

• Provide hazing prevention education.
• Publish clear hazing policies.
• Maintain and publish annual reports detailing hazing violations and disciplinary actions. This transparency, as seen at institutions like UT Austin (hazing.utexas.edu), can be a critical tool for City of Stafford parents to research organizations and can serve as pattern evidence in civil lawsuits.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Understanding the Difference

When a hazing incident occurs, two distinct legal avenues may open: criminal and civil. While they often involve the same set of facts, their goals, burdens of proof, and outcomes are vastly different.

Criminal Cases

• Purpose: Brought by the State of Texas (prosecutors) to punish illegal behavior and maintain public order.
• Parties: The State vs. the individual(s) or organization accused of hazing.
• Outcome: Conviction can lead to jail time, fines, probation, or community service. For organizations, it can mean fines or loss of university recognition.
• Examples of Charges: Hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, aggravated assault, or even involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide in cases resulting in serious injury or death.

Civil Cases

• Purpose: Brought by victims or their surviving family members to seek monetary compensation for harm suffered and to hold responsible parties accountable.
• Parties: The hazing victim or their family (plaintiffs) vs. the individuals, organizations, and institutions (defendants) they claim are responsible for the harm.
• Outcome: Monetary damages intended to cover medical expenses, lost income, pain and suffering, and other losses. Civil cases can also drive systemic changes within organizations and universities.
• Legal Theories: Common claims include negligence (failure to act reasonably to prevent harm), gross negligence (extreme carelessness), wrongful death, negligent supervision, premises liability, and intentional torts (like assault or battery).

Crucially, a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for a civil lawsuit. A civil case can proceed even if criminal charges are not filed, or if defendants are acquitted in criminal court. The burden of proof is lower in civil cases (“preponderance of the evidence” – more likely than not) compared to criminal cases (“beyond a reasonable doubt”).

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

Beyond Texas state law, federal regulations also influence how hazing is reported and addressed by universities, including those attended by many City of Stafford students.

Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024)

This federal law—which will be fully implemented by 2026—aims to increase transparency and prevention efforts. It requires colleges and universities that receive federal funding to:

• Mandatorily report all hazing incidents.
• Maintain a publicly available hazard log detailing hazing violations and enforcement actions.
• Provide comprehensive hazing prevention education to students.

This means that soon, City of Stafford families will have even greater access to information about hazing incidents at Texas universities, making it easier to identify high-risk organizations and hold institutions accountable.

Title IX and Clery Act

• Title IX: If hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based discrimination, or a hostile environment based on gender, it can trigger a university’s obligations under Title IX. This can open avenues for legal action beyond traditional hazing claims, especially given the strict requirements for universities to investigate and respond to such incidents.
• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. While hazing is not explicitly listed, many hazing incidents involve crimes that are (e.g., assault, alcohol violations, sexual offenses), meaning they should be included in a university’s annual Clery report. This provides another layer of public data for City of Stafford families to evaluate campus safety.

Who Can Be Held Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

One of the complexities of hazing litigation is identifying all potentially liable parties. An experienced hazing attorney understands that accountability often extends beyond the students directly involved.

• Individual Students: Those who planned, orchestrated, or actively participated in the hazing acts can be held personally liable for injuries they caused. This includes individuals who provided alcohol to minors or encouraged dangerous behavior.
• Local Chapter/Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, or student organization itself can be sued. The chapter, as an entity, may be held responsible for the actions of its members, especially if the hazing was part of a known practice, tradition, or implicitly condoned by leadership.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: Most Greek letter organizations are part of larger national bodies. These national organizations often set policies, provide training, collect dues, and have oversight over their local chapters. If a national organization knew or should have known about a pattern of hazing (either at the specific chapter or across its system), or if it failed to adequately enforce its anti-hazing policies, it can be held liable. This is particularly relevant when a local chapter’s hazing mirrors incidents that have occurred in other chapters nationwide.
• University or College: The educational institution itself can be a defendant. Universities have a duty to provide a safe learning environment, enforce their own policies, supervise student organizations, and respond to known dangers. Claims against universities often hinge on whether they were negligent in supervising the organization, failed to act on previous hazing reports, or allowed a dangerous culture to persist. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections than public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, and UT), but exceptions for gross negligence or Title IX violations can still apply to public institutions.
• Third Parties: Depending on the specifics, other entities might also be held responsible:
  • Landlords or Property Owners: If hazing occurred at an off-campus house where the owner knew or should have known about dangerous activities.
  • Alcohol Providers: Bars or stores that illegally sell alcohol to minors, contributing to hazing incidents.
  • Event Organizers/Sponsors: Any other individual or group that facilitated the hazing event.

Every hazing case is fact-specific, and the liable parties will vary depending on what happened, who knew what, and when. An experienced attorney can conduct a thorough investigation to identify all potential defendants.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragic stories of hazing victims across the United States serve as stark warnings and have shaped legal precedents that directly impact families in City of Stafford facing similar situations. These cases highlight common patterns of abuse and often expose systemic failures that can lead to criminal charges, multi-million-dollar civil settlements, and calls for legislative reform.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern: A Recurring Nightmare

Forced alcohol consumption continues to be the deadliest form of hazing, leading to numerous preventable deaths. The patterns seen in these cases are tragically consistent: young students pressured to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol, often with tragic delays in seeking medical help due to a pervasive culture of silence and fear.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after a “bid acceptance” event involving extreme alcohol consumption. Fraternity brothers forced him to drink large quantities of alcohol quickly. He suffered severe falls, including a head injury that went untreated for hours as fraternity members delayed calling 911, reportedly to avoid implicating themselves. The incident, partially captured on fraternity security cameras, led to more than 1,000 criminal counts against 18 fraternity members, including charges of involuntary manslaughter and aggravated assault. The civil litigation led to confidential settlements, and Pennsylvania enacted the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law, one of the toughest in the nation. This case showed how a pervasive “bro code” and fear of repercussion can lead to fatal delays in medical care.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to drink them. The incident resulted in multiple members being prosecuted, with most pleading guilty to misdemeanor hazing. Florida State University responded by temporarily suspending all Greek life, initiating a statewide anti-hazing movement. This tragedy underscored how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster within Greek organizations.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, 18, died after a “Bible study” drinking game where he was forced to consume large amounts of alcohol when he answered questions incorrectly. His blood alcohol content was 0.495% at the time of his death. Multiple fraternity members were charged, and one was convicted of negligent homicide. In response, Louisiana passed the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute. This case vividly demonstrated how seemingly innocent “games” can be deadly, and how legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of hazing.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, 20, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to drink an entire bottle of alcohol during a pledge event. Multiple fraternity members were convicted of hazing-related charges. In the civil realm, Foltz’s family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with $7 million from the Pi Kappa Alpha national fraternity and nearly $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This case highlighted that universities, even public ones, can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities, and that individual officers can face massive personal liability, as seen when a court ordered the chapter president to personally pay $6.5 million to the family.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern: Beyond Alcohol

While alcohol is frequently involved, physical and psychologically damaging hazing rituals are also pervasive and deadly.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng died after a retreat in Pennsylvania where he was blindfolded, weighted with a heavy backpack, and repeatedly tackled during a “glass ceiling” ritual. Fraternity members delayed calling for help for several hours, attempting to cover up the incident. Multiple members were convicted, and the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter – a landmark case for organizational criminal liability. Pi Delta Psi was banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years and fined over $110,000. This tragedy showed that off-campus “retreats” can be as dangerous or worse than on-campus events, often chosen specifically to evade university oversight.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse: Not Just Greek Life

It’s critical for City of Stafford families to understand that hazing is not confined to Greek letter organizations. Major athletic programs, driven by intense competition and team loyalty, can also be breeding grounds for abuse.

• Northwestern University Athletic Hazing Scandal (2023–2025): This wide-ranging series of allegations involved former football players claiming widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. Multiple players filed lawsuits against Northwestern University and its coaching staff. The scandal led to the firing of long-standing head football coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed a wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university (which was confidentially settled in August 2025). This case unequivocally demonstrated that hazing extends beyond Greek life into major, high-profile athletic programs and raised serious questions about institutional oversight and accountability.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies, while occurring outside of Texas, create critical precedents and illustrate patterns that directly impact City of Stafford families and students attending Texas universities:

• Common Threads: The consistent themes are forced drinking, humiliation, physical violence, a dangerous delay or denial of medical care, and concerted cover-up efforts.
• Foreseeability: These repeated incidents establish that universities and national fraternities know the risks of hazing. When a chapter at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor repeats a hazing behavior that has led to injury or death elsewhere, it directly supports arguments of foreseeability and negligence in a civil lawsuit.
• Multi-Million Dollar Accountability: The significant settlements and verdicts (ranging from $1 million to $14 million) in these cases demonstrate that courts and juries are willing to award substantial damages to victims and their families. This financial accountability often forces institutions to enact reforms and can provide critical resources for lifetime medical care in severe injury cases.
• Legislative Change: High-profile cases often spur new anti-hazing laws, like those seen in Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Ohio. While Texas has its own hazing laws, the national conversation continues to push for stronger protections.

Hazing is a predictable tragedy rooted in institutional failures. Texas families facing hazing at any state university are not alone, and their situations are informed by these national lessons of a widespread problem.

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

For City of Stafford families, understanding the specific hazing landscape at Texas’ prominent universities is paramount. Each institution carries its own culture, policies, and history of addressing – or failing to address – hazing. The Manginello Law Firm has deep experience navigating these complexities across the Lone Star State. Being located in Fort Bend County, City of Stafford families often have connections to these major universities, whether through current students, alumni, or future aspirations.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Houston, a vibrant and diverse urban campus, stands as a major academic and research institution in the heart of the Greater Houston area. Many City of Stafford residents find UH to be a convenient and high-quality option for higher education. UH boasts a dynamic Greek life with numerous fraternities and sororities (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, Multicultural Greek Council), alongside a vast array of student organizations, sports clubs, and spirit groups. This rich campus life, while offering incredible opportunities, also presents potential environments where hazing can occur.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UH maintains a clear, strict anti-hazing policy, prohibiting hazing on or off-campus. Their policy encompasses all forms of hazing, including forced consumption of alcohol/food/drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and mental distress tied to initiation or membership. Students and families can report suspected hazing through the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD), or via online reporting forms. UH also aims to provide information regarding hazing incidents and disciplinary actions on its website.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2016): One of the more severe incidents involved the Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) fraternity. Pledges reported being deprived of adequate food, water, and sleep during a multi-day event. Tragically, one student suffered a lacerated spleen after allegedly being slammed onto a table or similar surface. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was ultimately suspended by the university.
• Subtle Hazing Incidents: Subsequent years have seen a range of disciplinary actions related to less severe, but still prohibited, hazing behaviors. UH disciplinary references have cited various fraternities for conduct “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” often involving alcohol misuse and policy violations, leading to suspensions and probationary periods. These underscore the persistent challenge of enforcing anti-hazing policies within active Greek systems.

These incidents highlight UH’s commitment to penalizing hazing, but also reveal the ongoing struggle to eradicate it entirely, particularly in chapters prone to repeating prohibited behaviors.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a hazing incident at UH, particularly for City of Stafford families, several jurisdictional factors come into play. Involved agencies may include the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) for on-campus incidents, or the Houston Police Department and Harris County Sheriff’s Office for off-campus events within the sprawling city limits of Houston. Civil lawsuits stemming from UH hazing incidents would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. Potential defendants would include the individual students involved, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and potentially the University of Houston itself, along with any liable property owners or alcohol providers.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

• Familiarize yourself with UH’s anti-hazing policies: Understand what constitutes a violation and the official reporting channels available via the university website.
• Utilize UH’s reporting mechanisms: Contact the Dean of Students, UHPD, or use online reporting options promptly if you suspect or experience hazing.
• Document everything: For City of Stafford families, this means actively collecting and preserving any evidence, including screenshots of group chats, photos of injuries, and accounts from other witnesses.
• Seek legal counsel immediately: If you suspect hazing, especially if injuries or significant emotional distress have occurred, contact an attorney like The Manginello Law Firm experienced in Houston-based hazing cases. We can help you navigate university processes and determine if there are grounds for civil or criminal action.

5.2 Texas A&M University

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M University, located in College Station, is deeply defined by its unique traditions, unparalleled school spirit, and the revered Corps of Cadets. It attracts many students from across Texas, including City of Stafford and Fort Bend County, who are drawn to its strong academic programs and rich sense of community. The university’s culture, while fostering immense loyalty, also sometimes struggles with a hidden undercurrent of hazing, both within some Greek life organizations and elements of the Corps of Cadets, where notions of “toughness” and “tradition” can be distorted into abuse.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M unequivocally prohibits hazing in all recognized student organizations and within the Corps of Cadets. Their policies clearly define hazing and mandate reporting. Students and families can report hazing via the university’s Student Conduct Office, the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD), or through anonymous reporting systems linked on student affairs websites. Specific Corps regulations are also in place to address potential hazing within its ranks.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (Approx. 2021): One of the most horrifying hazing incidents at Texas A&M involved the Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) fraternity. Two pledges alleged severe abuse where 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 pledges filed a $1 million lawsuit against the fraternity and individuals, and the university suspended the chapter for two years. The national fraternity also placed the chapter under a cease and desist. This case starkly illustrates the dangers of chemical hazing and the extreme physical harm it can inflict.
• Corps of Cadets Hazing (2023): A significant incident within the Corps involved a cadet alleging degrading and potentially sexualized hazing. The lawsuit claimed he was subjected to simulated sexual acts, blindfolded, and bound between two beds in a humiliating “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The cadet sought over $1 million in damages, highlighting how hazing can extend to prestigious, tradition-bound groups beyond Greek life. Texas A&M stated it addressed the matter under its internal regulations.
• Kappa Sigma (2023, Ongoing): Allegations surfaced against the Kappa Sigma fraternity regarding hazing that reportedly resulted in severe physical injuries, specifically rhabdomyolysis (a dangerous condition involving severe muscle breakdown from extreme physical activity). This incident is part of ongoing litigation, drawing attention to hazing practices that push individuals to physical limits.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases at Texas A&M would involve the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) for on-campus incidents or the Bryan/College Station Police Department for off-campus hazing. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Brazos County. Due to the university’s status as a public institution, specific legal nuances regarding sovereign immunity might arise, but exceptions for gross negligence or the ability to sue individual employees can still be leveraged. For City of Stafford families, this means navigating the legal process requires counsel familiar with both state hazing law and the intricacies of public university litigation.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

• Be aware of Corps culture: For those interested in the Corps of Cadets, understand the line between legitimate training and hazing. Report any concerns early.
• Investigate Greek organizations: Review any hazing report data published by Texas A&M for fraternities or sororities your child is interested in.
• Document and report: If you suspect or witness hazing, secure evidence immediately (photos, messages) and report to A&M’s Student Conduct office, UPD, or an outside authority.
• Contact Attorney911: Our firm has experience with cases involving Texas A&M, including the complexities of its unique culture and the challenges of litigating against a major public institution. We can help City of Stafford families understand their rights and pursue accountability.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin, a flagship institution, is known for its academic rigor, vibrant student body, and energetic campus life deeply entwined with Texas identity. From its sprawling Greek system to countless spirit organizations and tradition-rich groups like the Texas Cowboys and various academic and professional fraternities, UT offers a diverse college experience. For City of Stafford families, UT Austin is a common destination, but the high-energy environment and strong emphasis on traditions can, unfortunately, also create conditions ripe for hazing.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas has a comprehensive anti-hazing policy that applies to all student organizations, on or off campus. They prohibit any act that endangers mental or physical health or safety for affiliation purposes. UT Austin is particularly notable for its public Hazing Violations Log (hazing.utexas.edu), which transparently lists organizations, dates of incidents, a summary of the conduct, and the disciplinary sanctions imposed. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students office, the UT Police Department (UTPD), and anonymous online forms.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT’s Public Hazing Violations Log details numerous incidents, providing critical insight into patterns:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): The Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) chapter was disciplined after new members were directed to consume excessive amounts of milk and perform strenuous calisthenics. This was found to constitute hazing and resulted in the chapter being placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education.
• Texas Wranglers (2022): This well-known spirit organization faced disciplinary action for hazing that included forced workouts, alcohol misuse, and other punishment-based practices targeting new members.
• Other Greek and Non-Greek Organizations: The log frequently lists various fraternities and sororities (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, Multicultural), as well as academic, professional, and cultural student organizations, for violations ranging from forced consumption of undesirable substances to sleep deprivation and public humiliation.

The transparency of UT’s log is a double-edged sword: it highlights the university’s commitment to reporting but also reveals the persistent nature of hazing despite punitive measures. These repeated violations within specific organizations indicate that some hazing cultures are deeply entrenched.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

For City of Stafford families pursuing a hazing case at UT Austin, legal jurisdiction would typically fall under courts in Travis County. The UT Police Department (UTPD) handles on-campus incidents, while the Austin Police Department would be involved in off-campus hazing. Civil lawsuits would name individual perpetrators, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially the university itself. The existence of UT’s transparent public hazing log is a significant advantage for plaintiffs, as it can directly demonstrate patterns of prior violations and the university’s (or national organization’s) knowledge of recurring issues, strengthening arguments of negligence and foreseeability.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

• Consult the UT Hazing Violations Log: Before joining any organization, City of Stafford families should review the log at hazing.utexas.edu for any red flags or disciplinary history.
• Understand UT’s reporting structure: Know how to formally report hazing to the Dean of Students or UTPD.
• Preserve evidence: As with any hazing incident, immediate and thorough preservation of digital communications, photos, medical records, and witness accounts is essential.
• Contact a lawyer early: The Manginello Law Firm is adept at utilizing institutional transparency, or lack thereof, to build strong hazing cases. For families seeking accountability for hazing at UT Austin, early legal consultation is paramount to ensure evidence is secured and strategy is developed.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Southern Methodist University, nestled in Dallas, is a distinguished private institution known for its beautiful campus, rigorous academics, and a vibrant, often affluent, student body. For City of Stafford families, SMU is a major draw for students seeking a private university experience. SMU has a highly active Greek life, which plays a significant role in student social circles. The prestige and close-knit nature of many SMU organizations, particularly fraternities and sororities, can unfortunately also create environments where hazing is perceived as a barrier to entry or a test of loyalty.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU has a comprehensive anti-hazing policy that applies to all student organizations, explicitly prohibiting any activity that endangers mental or physical health for membership purposes. Given its private status, SMU’s policies are often more rigorously enforced than those of public institutions. Reporting channels include the Office of Student Conduct, the SMU Police Department, and anonymous online reporting systems such as “Real Response,” designed to encourage students to come forward without fear of retaliation.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017 & 2021): The Kappa Alpha Order (KA) chapter at SMU faced significant disciplinary action multiple times. In 2017, the chapter was suspended following allegations of hazing that included new members being paddled, forced to consume alcohol, and deprived of sleep. This led to a multi-year suspension of activities. In 2021, the chapter faced further allegations and renewed sanctions, indicating a persistent challenge in eradicating hazing behaviors.
• Other Greek Organizations: SMU’s Student Conduct records and previous public statements have cited other fraternities and sororities for varying degrees of hazing, including alcohol misuse and forced demeaning acts, resulting in probation, suspensions, and mandatory educational programs.

These incidents underscore that despite SMU’s proactive anti-hazing stance, enforcement remains a continuous effort against deeply ingrained traditional practices within certain organizations.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases at SMU for City of Stafford families would typically be handled by the SMU Police Department for on-campus incidents or the Dallas Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Dallas County. As a private university, SMU does not benefit from the same sovereign immunity defenses that public institutions like UT or Texas A&M might claim, potentially simplifying the process of holding the university directly liable for negligence. However, private institutions often zealously guard their internal records, requiring experienced legal counsel to compel discovery.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

• Research SMU’s hazing history: While private universities may not have public logs as detailed as UT’s, seeking information from parent groups, alumni networks, and official SMU publications can provide insights into an organization’s history.
• Understand SMU’s reporting mechanisms: Familiarize yourself with how to report through the Office of Student Conduct or their anonymous “Real Response” system.
• Document fear of retaliation: If your child fears social or physical retaliation for reporting hazing, document these fears and share them with the university’s student conduct office or SMU PD.
• Prompt legal action: For City of Stafford families, contacting The Manginello Law Firm early is critical. Our experience navigating litigation against private universities means we know how to overcome challenges in accessing information and building a strong case.

5.5 Baylor University

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University, located in Waco, is the largest Baptist university in the world, known for its distinct Christian identity, strong academic programs, and passionate athletic teams. For City of Stafford families seeking a faith-based educational environment, Baylor is a prominent choice. The university’s emphasis on values and community creates a unique campus culture. However, like other universities, Baylor’s Greek life, athletic programs, and spirit organizations have, at times, faced hazing allegations, raising questions about the university’s oversight and the enforcement of its ethical standards.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University has a clear, zero-tolerance policy against hazing, grounded in its Christian values and commitment to student welfare. Their policy is comprehensive, covering both on and off-campus activities and explicitly prohibiting any action that endangers mental or physical health for the purpose of initiation or membership. Reporting channels include the Department of Student Conduct, the Baylor Police Department (BUPD), and various online reporting forms designed for incidents of harassment, misconduct, or hazing.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor has faced significant institutional scrutiny in the past over issues like its football program’s handling of sexual assault allegations, which underscore broader challenges in institutional oversight and accountability. Against this backdrop, hazing incidents have also occurred:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): An investigation into the Baylor baseball team in 2020 determined that hazing had occurred, leading to the suspension of 14 players. These suspensions were deliberately staggered to allow the team to compete, raising questions about whether competitive interests sometimes outweigh immediate disciplinary action. The hazing allegations involved activities that were deemed demeaning or physically taxing.
• Greek Life Disciplines: While specific details are often less publicly broadcast for private institutions, Baylor has disciplined various Greek organizations over the years for hazing-related violations, resulting in probation, social restrictions, or temporary suspensions.

These incidents highlight the ongoing tension between a stated “zero tolerance” policy and the realities of enforcing it within a culture that may try to protect its traditions or perceived brand image.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For City of Stafford families pursuing a hazing case at Baylor, legal jurisdiction would typically be in McLennan County. The Baylor Police Department (BUPD) handles on-campus incidents, and the Waco Police Department would be involved for off-campus events. As a private university, Baylor does not have sovereign immunity, meaning it can be sued directly for negligence, breach of contract, or other civil claims. However, private universities often have substantial legal resources and may aggressively defend against such claims. Accessing internal records typically requires persistent discovery motions.

5.2.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

• Scrutinize official statements: For City of Stafford families concerned about Baylor, pay attention to how the university handles allegations, not just its public policy statements.
• Utilize reporting channels: Understand Baylor’s specific reporting procedures through the Department of Student Conduct or BUPD.
• Document and secure evidence: Even at a private institution, digital evidence from group chats, photos, and witness accounts are absolutely critical.
• Consult experienced legal counsel: Given Baylor’s unique institutional history and its private status, engaging with a firm like The Manginello Law Firm, which has experience with complex university litigation, is essential to navigate the legal process effectively and pursue accountability.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For City of Stafford families, recognizing the specific fraternities and sororities on Texas campuses that have a history of hazing, both locally and nationally, is a critical step in prevention and seeking accountability. Many of the Greek organizations at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor are chapters of larger national bodies. These national organizations often have extensive histories of hazing incidents, even deaths, across their chapters nationwide. This pattern of behavior is not merely circumstantial; it forms the foundation of legal arguments around foreseeability and institutional negligence.

Why National Histories Matter

When a chapter in Houston, College Station, Austin, Dallas, or Waco repeats hazing behaviors that have injured or killed students at other campuses across the country, it demonstrates a clear pattern. This pattern indicates that the national organization likely had:

• Prior Notice: They were aware, or should have been aware, of the propensity for specific hazing methods (e.g., forced alcohol consumption at “Big/Little” events, physical endurance tests) within their chapters.
• Foreseeability: They could reasonably foresee that such hazing, if not aggressively curbed, would lead to harm.
• Failure to Act: Despite this knowledge, they failed to implement or enforce policies effectively, failed to provide adequate training, or failed to sufficiently punish repeat offenders.

In a civil lawsuit, this pattern evidence can be crucial for establishing:

• Negligence: The national organization was negligent in its oversight, training, or discipline.
• Gross Negligence: Their conduct rose to the level of extreme carelessness or reckless disregard for student safety.
• Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, juries may award punitive damages to punish the national organization and deter future hazing.

Organization Mapping: Selected Fraternities and Sororities with Documented Hazing Histories

While nearly any organization can engage in hazing, some national fraternities have highly publicized histories of severe incidents, including deaths. This does not mean every chapter of these organizations engages in hazing, but it highlights a need for extreme vigilance and scrutiny.

Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike)

• National Identity: One of the largest and oldest fraternities, known for its widespread presence on college campuses.
• National Hazing History: Pi Kappa Alpha has a deeply troubling national history of severe hazing, particularly involving forced alcohol consumption and “Big/Little” events:
  • Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University (2021): As discussed, Foltz died from alcohol poisoning after a “Big/Little” event where he was forced to consume an entire bottle of liquor. This led to a $10 million settlement and multiple criminal convictions. The incident highlighted that the national organization knew or should have known about this specific hazing method’s dangers.
  • David Bogenberger – Northern Illinois University (2012): Another pledge death from alcohol poisoning during a fraternity event. The family later received a $14 million settlement, distributed among 44 individuals.
• Relevance to Texas: Local Pi Kappa Alpha chapters at Texas universities, including UT Austin and UH, have faced disciplinary action for hazing, with incidents often mirroring these national patterns of alcohol misuse and physical activities. The very existence of these national precedents underscores the foreseeability of such conduct at any Pike chapter in Texas.

Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE)

• National Identity: Another historically large and influential fraternity with a long presence on major campuses.
• National Hazing History: SAE has faced multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries nationwide, prompting its national organization to implement significant, albeit sometimes ineffective, reforms.
  • Texas A&M University (Approx. 2021): As detailed, a local chapter incident led to two pledges suffering severe chemical burns after industrial cleaner and other substances were poured on them, resulting in a $1 million lawsuit and university suspension.
  • University of Alabama (2023): A recent lawsuit was filed against an SAE chapter alleging a pledge suffered a traumatic brain injury during a hazing ritual.
  • University of Texas at Austin (2024): An Australian exchange student alleged a brutal assault by SAE members, resulting in severe leg and facial injuries, at a party while the chapter was already under suspension for prior safety violations.
• Relevance to Texas: The Texas A&M and UT Austin incidents demonstrate that SAE chapters within Texas continue to engage in dangerous hazing practices, mirroring national patterns of severe physical and chemical hazing despite the national organization’s stated reforms and disciplinary history.

Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ)

• National Identity: A well-established national fraternity.
• National Hazing History: Phi Delta Theta is prominently associated with critical alcohol hazing tragedies.
  • Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University (2017): Gruver’s alcohol poisoning death during a “Bible study” drinking game directly led to Louisiana’s felony anti-hazing law, the Max Gruver Act. The civil case resulted in a $6.1 million verdict and confidential settlements.
• Relevance to Texas: Phi Delta Theta chapters exist at campuses including UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor. The national organization’s experience with the Gruver case means it is acutely aware of the dangers of forced drinking and should be held to the highest standard of prevention and enforcement in Texas.

Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ)

• National Identity: A prominent national fraternity.
• National Hazing History: Pi Kappa Phi has faced severe alcohol-related hazing incidents.
  • Andrew Coffey – Florida State University (2017): Coffey’s death from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event (where pledges were given handles of hard liquor) became a major catalyst for anti-hazing reforms across Florida.
• Relevance to Texas: Lessons from the FSU tragedy should directly inform policies and enforcement at Pi Kappa Phi chapters present at Texas universities, obligating the national and local chapters to ensure such dangerously designed events are never repeated.

Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ)

• National Identity: One of the oldest and largest national fraternities.
• National Hazing History: Kappa Sigma has a historical pattern of incidents involving both alcohol and physical hazing.
  • Chad Meredith – University of Miami (2001): Meredith, 18, drowned after fraternity members pressured him to swim across a lake while intoxicated. A jury awarded his parents a $12.6 million verdict based on hazing, which spurred critical anti-hazing laws in Florida.
  • Texas A&M University (2023): Allegations of hazing within the Texas A&M chapter led to pledges suffering severe injuries, specifically rhabdomyolysis, due to extreme physical exertions. This ongoing civil litigation highlights the continuation of dangerous hazing traditions.
• Relevance to Texas: The Texas A&M incident of rhabdomyolysis is a direct and recent example of severe physical hazing occurring within a Kappa Sigma chapter in Texas, demonstrating that national patterns manifest locally.

Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI)

• National Identity: A well-known national fraternity across major universities.
• National Hazing History: Phi Gamma Delta is tied to one of the most severe non-fatal hazing injuries.
  • Danny Santulli – University of Missouri (2021): Santulli, 18, suffered severe, permanent brain damage after being forced to consume excessive alcohol during a “pledge dad reveal” night. He requires 24/7 care. His family settled lawsuits with 22 defendants for multi-million-dollar confidential amounts, illustrating the catastrophic costs and lifelong consequences of hazing.
• Relevance to Texas: Phi Gamma Delta chapters are present at Texas universities. The Santulli case serves as an extreme example of the potential for any chapter’s alcohol hazing to cause devastating long-term injury.

Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ)

• National Identity: A historically black fraternity (NPHC “Divine Nine”).
• National Hazing History: While NPHC organizations officially ban hazing, historically, some chapters have been associated with physical hazing, including paddling.
  • Joseph Snell – Bowie State University (1997): Snell endured severe beatings and burns over a four-week hazing period, leading to a $375,000 verdict against the fraternity. This was a critical early case affirming that both local chapters and national organizations could be held liable.
  • University of Southern Mississippi (2023): A former student filed a federal lawsuit alleging severe beatings with a wooden paddle during “Hell Night,” requiring emergency surgery and months of rehabilitation.
• Relevance to Texas: Omega Psi Phi chapters exist at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor. These national precedents are crucial for demonstrating the history and inherent risks within some chapters.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

For City of Stafford families, this detailed mapping of national and local hazing histories is not just informational; it is a critical component of legal strategy. When a lawsuit is filed, experienced hazing attorneys will investigate whether the national organization:

• Had a pattern of similar incidents: Showing that the current hazing at a Texas university was not an isolated event.
• Received prior warnings: Did news reports, prior university sanctions, or internal communications repeatedly flag dangerous behaviors?
• Failed to enforce its own policies: Did thick anti-hazing manuals serve merely as “paper policies” with inadequate monitoring or meaningful consequences for violations?

This evidence can directly impact:

• Settlement Leverage: Demonstrating a pattern of negligence often forces national organizations and their insurers to consider higher settlements to avoid trial and bad publicity.
• Insurance Coverage Disputes: It helps overcome arguments that hazing was an “unforeseeable” or “intentional” act outside policy coverage.
• Punitive Damages: A history of repeated, ignored warnings can be key to a jury awarding punitive damages, which are designed to punish egregious conduct and deter future harm.

The Manginello Law Firm understands that holding these powerful entities accountable requires a deep dive into both local incidents and national historical patterns.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Building a successful hazing case in Texas is a complex endeavor that requires meticulous investigation, a deep understanding of legal strategy, and a firm willing to challenge powerful institutions. For City of Stafford families, knowing what kind of evidence is critical and what damages can be pursued is empowering.

Critical Evidence in Hazing Cases

In today’s digital world, evidence is abundant but also volatile. It requires swift, strategic preservation.

• Digital Communications: These are often the “smoking gun.”

  • GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Signal, Discord, Snapchat, Instagram DMs: These platforms are goldmines, revealing planning meetings, explicit hazing commands, peer pressure, derogatory comments, and even celebratory messages after an event. Crucially, messages are often deleted or set to auto-delete. Screenshotting full threads, including sender names and timestamps, is paramount. 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.
  • Emails: Official chapter communications often contain schedules, instructions, or subtle threats.

• Photos & Videos:

  • Content filmed by members: Many hazing incidents are filmed for “trophies” or shared in private group chats. These can be devastating evidence.
  • Injuries: Detailed photos of any physical injuries (bruises, chemical burns, cuts, swelling) taken immediately after the incident and over subsequent days, with a scale (like a coin or ruler), are vital.
  • Locations/Objects: Photos of the off-campus house, any bottles of alcohol, paddles, or other props used.
  • Security Footage: Surveillance cameras at venues, bars, or even residential doorbell cameras (Ring, Nest) might capture people arriving or leaving hazing events, or the condition of the victim.

• Internal Organization Documents:

  • Pledge Manuals/Instructions: While often generic, they can sometimes reveal coded language or directly contradict national anti-hazing policies, proving intent to deceive.
  • Ritual Scripts: Actual scripts used for initiation rituals can expose the degrading or dangerous nature of “traditions.”
  • Constitutions/Bylaws: These outline an organization’s structure and responsibilities.
  • Emails/Texts from Officers: Communications planning hazing, instructing members on secrecy, or coaching them on what to say if questioned.
  • National Policies/Training Materials: Used to establish what the national organization knew or should have known about hazing risks.

• University Records:

  • Prior Conduct Files: Official university records of past hazing violations, probation, suspensions, or warnings involving the same organization or individuals. These establish a pattern and the university’s prior knowledge.
  • Incident Reports: Reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices.
  • Clery Act Reports: Annual crime statistics that may indirectly reveal a pattern of alcohol-related incidents or assaults.
  • Internal Emails: Correspondence between university administrators about hazing concerns, obtained through discovery or public records requests.

• Medical and Psychological Records:

  • Emergency Room/Hospital Records: Crucial for documenting injuries, blood alcohol content, toxicology results, and the immediate medical response. It is vital that victims tell medical staff they were hazed to ensure this is documented.
  • Therapy/Counseling Notes: Professionals can document emotional distress, PTSD, anxiety, or depression resulting from hazing.

• Witness Testimony:

  • Statements from other pledges, current members who felt uncomfortable, former members who quit, roommates, RAs, or even bystanders. They can corroborate the hazing activities and the environment of coercion.

Recoverable Damages in Hazing Cases

Hazing can inflict profound harm—physical, emotional, and financial. Texas law allows victims and their families to seek monetary damages to compensate for these losses.

Economic Damages (Quantifiable Financial Losses)

• Medical Expenses: All past and future costs for emergency care, hospital stays, surgeries, physical therapy, medications, and specialist consultations (e.g., neurologists for brain injuries, nephrologists for organ damage, psychologists for trauma). For catastrophic injuries (like Danny Santulli’s), this includes the cost of a lifetime of specialized care.
• Lost Income & Earning Capacity: If the hazing caused injuries that led to missed work, inability to complete studies, or future diminished earnings (e.g., a brain injury that prevents a student from pursuing their intended career), these losses can be recovered. Economists often help calculate future earning capacity.
• Lost Educational Opportunities: This includes tuition and fees for semesters missed, lost scholarships, and costs associated with transferring to a different institution if returning to the original campus is no longer viable.

Non-Economic Damages (Subjective, Legally Compensable)

• Physical Pain and Suffering: Compensation for the actual physical pain from injuries, including chronic pain, disfigurement, or scarring.
• Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: This often constitutes a significant portion of damages in hazing cases. It covers conditions like Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), severe anxiety, depression, humiliation, shame, loss of dignity, and the profound trauma of the experience.
• Loss of Enjoyment of Life: If the hazing leads to an inability to participate in activities previously enjoyed, such as sports, hobbies, or social events, or impacts the overall quality of life.

Wrongful Death Damages (For Families)

When hazing results in death, surviving family members (parents, spouses, children) can pursue wrongful death claims to compensate for their immense losses:

• Funeral and Burial Costs: Direct expenses related to the deceased.
• Loss of Financial Support: Compensation for the income and financial contributions the deceased would have provided over their lifetime.
• Loss of Companionship, Love, and Society: This accounts for the intangible but profound loss of the relationship with the deceased, including emotional support, guidance, comfort, and affection.
• Grief and Emotional Suffering: The profound emotional pain experienced by family members due to the sudden and tragic loss.

Punitive (Exemplary) Damages

In cases where the defendants’ conduct was particularly egregious, reckless, willful, or malicious, juries may award punitive damages. These are not meant to compensate the victim but to punish the defendants and deter others from similar conduct. In Texas, punitive damages are available but often capped. However, for certain intentional torts or cases of gross negligence, an experienced attorney can argue for significant punitive damages to hold institutions fully accountable.

Navigating Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Hazing litigation often involves powerful defendants and complex insurance policies.

• Defense Strategies: Universities and national fraternities employ sophisticated legal teams. They often argue that the victim consented, the incident happened off-campus (thus outside their control), or that individual members acted “rogue” against clear anti-hazing policies (as detailed in Appendix B: Institutional & Organizational Defense Playbook).
• Insurance Battles: National fraternities, local chapters, and universities typically carry insurance policies. However, insurers frequently try to deny coverage, arguing that hazing, especially if it involves “intentional” acts or criminal behavior, is excluded under their policy terms.
• Attorney911’s Advantage: Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney is invaluable here. She understands how these large companies value claims, their negotiation tactics, and their strategies for denying coverage. Coupled with Ralph Manginello’s complex litigation experience against massive corporations, our firm is uniquely positioned to identify all potential sources of recovery, aggressively challenge insurance denials, and negotiate the best possible outcomes for our clients, or take the case to trial if necessary. We use every tool in our arsenal to ensure that all accountable parties – individuals, chapters, national organizations, and universities – contribute to a just resolution.

Practical Guides & FAQs

For City of Stafford families, understanding what to do (and what not to do) in a hazing situation is crucial. These practical guides offer actionable advice for parents, students, and witnesses.

8.1 For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

Parents are often the first to notice subtle, but alarming, changes in their child. Trust your instincts.

Warning Signs Your Child May Be Being Hazed

• Physical Changes: Unexplained bruises, burns, cuts, or other injuries, especially if explanations seem vague or don’t add up. Extreme fatigue, weight fluctuation, or signs of sleep deprivation (e.g., constant late nights, calls at 3 AM for “mandatory” activities). Also look for chemical burns, rashes, or recurrent illness.
• Behavioral & Emotional Shifts: Sudden secrecy about their organization’s activities (“I can’t talk about it,” “it’s a secret for new members”). Withdrawal from old friends or family, or from activities they once enjoyed. Noticeable increase in anxiety, depression, irritability, or anger. A defensive attitude when asked about the group. Expressing fear of “getting in trouble” or “letting the chapter down.”
• Academic Red Flags: A sudden and unexplained drop in grades, missing classes, falling asleep during lectures, or deferring academic responsibilities due to “mandatory” group events.
• Financial Red Flags: Unexplained requests for money, sudden large expenses, “fines,” or purchasing excessive alcohol or items for older members.
• Digital Behavior: Constant monitoring of their phone for group chat notifications, extreme anxiety when their phone pings, or obsessive deletion of messages/browsing history. Geo-location tracking apps appearing on their phone without clear explanation.

How to Talk to Your Child

Approach your child with empathy and without judgment. Your goal is to create a safe space for them to open up.

• “How are things going with [organization]? Are you enjoying it?”
• “Are they respecting your time for classes and sleep?”
• “What do they ask you to do as a new member?”
• “Is there anything that makes you uncomfortable, or anything you wish you didn’t have to do?”
• “Have you seen anyone get hurt, or have you been hurt yourself?”
• “Do you feel like you can leave if you want to, or would there be negative consequences?”
• “Are they asking you to keep secrets from me or the university?”

If your child opens up, listen carefully and validate their feelings. Reassure them that their safety and well-being are your top priorities. If they shut down, don’t force it in that moment, but continue to monitor their behavior closely and signal your unwavering support.

If Your Child is Hurt: Immediate Action

• If your child is in immediate physical danger (intoxicated, injured, threatening self-harm), call 911 or campus police immediately. Prioritize their safety and health above all.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: Write down dates, times, and everything your child tells you while it’s fresh in your mind. If your child shows you texts, group chats, or photos, screenshot them immediately or take clear photos of their phone screen. Photograph any visible injuries from multiple angles. Save any physical items that could be evidence (damaged clothing, receipts for forced purchases).
• Reporting Mechanisms: Contact the university’s Dean of Students office or Office of Student Conduct. If crimes are involved (assault, sexual assault, providing alcohol to minors), file a report with campus police or local police. Many schools and national organizations have anonymous hotlines. The National Anti-Hazing Hotline (1-888-NOT-HAZE) is also available 24/7 for anonymous reporting.
• Seek Legal Consultation Early: Even if you’re unsure about pursuing a lawsuit, contact an attorney experienced in hazing cases. We can help you preserve critical evidence before it’s destroyed, navigate university investigation processes (which can be adversarial), and advise on the best legal path forward.

What NOT to Do

• Do not confront the fraternity/sorority directly: They will likely destroy evidence, coordinate stories, and retaliate.
• Do not sign anything: Do not sign any documents from the university or insurance companies without legal advice. You may inadvertently waive your rights.
• Do not post on public social media: This can compromise your case and give defense attorneys material to use against you.
• Do not let the university convince you that “this is being handled internally” if you are seeking real accountability beyond a mere slap on the wrist.

8.2 For Students / Pledges: Self-Assessment & Safety Planning

Your safety and well-being are paramount. You have the right to be treated with dignity and respect.

Is This Hazing? A Decision Guide

Ask yourself these critical questions:

• Am I being forced or pressured to do something I don’t want to do?
• Would I do this activity if I had a true choice, free from social consequences or fear of being “cut”?
• Is this activity dangerous, degrading, illegal, or does it cause me physical or mental harm?
• Would my parents or the university approve if they knew exactly what was happening?
• Are older members making new members do things they are not required to do themselves?
• Is this “tradition” truly about positive bonding, or is it merely about proving myself, humiliation, or entitlement for older members?
• Am I being told to keep secrets, lie, or hide this from people outside the organization?

If you answered YES to any of these questions, it’s very likely hazing. Remember the three tiers: Subtle hazing (servitude, social control), harassment hazing (verbal abuse, sleep deprivation), and violent hazing (forced drinking, beatings, sexual acts). If you’re experiencing any of these, it’s hazing and it’s unacceptable.

How to Exit Safely

• In immediate danger: Call 911 or campus police. Get to a safe location (your dorm, a trusted friend’s place, a public area). Most schools and Texas law (good-faith immunity reporter) will protect you from punishment for seeking help in a medical emergency, even if underage drinking was involved.
• If you want to quit/de-pledge: You have the legal right to leave at any time. There is no penalty for quitting a pledge process. Inform a trusted adult (parent, RA, academic advisor) first. Then, send a clear email or text to the chapter president or new member educator stating: “I am resigning my pledge/membership effective immediately.” Do not attend “one last meeting” where you might be pressured or intimidated.
• Protect yourself from retaliation: Document any threats or harassment (screenshots, witness accounts). Report fears of retaliation to the Dean of Students or campus police. In Texas, harassment and stalking are crimes, and protective orders may be available.

Evidence Collection (For Students)

While it’s happening or immediately after, try to safely collect:

1. Screenshots of group chats: Capture full conversations, timestamps, and participant names. Do not crop.
2. Voice Memos/Recordings: In Texas, you can legally record conversations you are a party to (one-party consent).
3. Photos/Videos: Document injuries, locations, and any objects used in hazing.
4. Save Everything Digital: Do not delete anything (texts, DMs, social media posts). Back up your phone to the cloud or email important items to yourself.
5. Medical Documentation: If you seek medical care, tell providers you were hazed so it’s noted in your records.

Who to Trust / Where to Report

• On Campus: Dean of Students office, Office of Student Conduct, Title IX Coordinator (if sexual harassment involved), Campus Police, Counseling Center (confidential support).
• Off Campus: Local Police (City of Stafford PD, Sugar Land PD, Missouri City PD, or Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office for local incidents), National Anti-Hazing Hotline (1-888-NOT-HAZE), or a lawyer specializing in hazing cases (confidential attorney-client privilege).
• Be Cautious With: Fraternity/sorority advisors employed by the organization, Greek Life offices at some schools (their priority might be protecting the Greek system), and friends still in the organization (they may feel conflicted or report back to leadership).

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were part of a hazing incident and now feel guilt or remorse, your decision to come forward can be incredibly powerful.

• Prevent Future Harm: Your testimony or evidence may be the key to preventing another student from suffering the same fate, or worse.
• A Path to Accountability: While you may need your own legal advice, cooperating with an investigation can be an important step toward righting wrongs and holding perpetrators responsible.
• Legal Guidance: An attorney can advise you on your rights, potential liabilities, and how to safely navigate the process of providing information to both university and legal authorities as a witness or even a co-defendant.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Case

For City of Stafford families, avoiding these common missteps is just as important as knowing what to do. These mistakes can destroy your legal options, compromise evidence, and undermine your credibility. Watch Attorney911’s video on client mistakes that can ruin your case at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY.

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

   • What parents think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This makes civil cases nearly impossible, can constitute obstruction of justice, and looks like a cover-up.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing or supposedly “harmless” content.

2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly.

   • What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind.”
   • Why it’s wrong: They will immediately lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare defenses before you’ve even had a chance to build your case.
   • What to do instead: Document everything, then call a lawyer before any direct confrontation.

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

   • What universities do: Often pressure families to sign waivers or “internal resolution” agreements that may seem expedient.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue a civil lawsuit, and any settlement offered will likely be a fraction of what your case is truly worth.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or any organization without an attorney reviewing it first.

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

   • What families think: “I want people to know what happened.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Defense attorneys actively monitor social media. Inconsistencies or emotional posts can be used against you, damage your credibility, and potentially waive legal privileges.
   • What to do instead: Document privately. Let your legal counsel control public messaging strategically.

5. Letting your child go back for “one last meeting” with the organization.

   • What perpetrators say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic” or “Let’s clear things up.”
   • Why it’s wrong: They will pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can later be used to weaken or derail your case.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication from or to the organization should go through your lawyer.

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

   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating; please let us handle this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, the statute of limitations runs, and the university often prioritizes its reputation over victim accountability. Internal resolutions rarely bring the full justice a civil lawsuit can.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW. Consult an attorney immediately. The internal university process is distinct from achieving real civil accountability.

7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer.

   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim” or “We want to help.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Recorded statements are almost always used against you, and initial settlement offers are typically lowball. Adjusters are trained to minimize payouts.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline and state: “My attorney will contact you regarding this matter.”

8.5 Short FAQ

“Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”

Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin benefit from some sovereign immunity protections under Texas law. However, exceptions exist for gross negligence, certain property-related claims, and violations of federal laws like Title IX. Private universities such as SMU and Baylor have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on its specific facts – contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

“Is hazing a felony in Texas?”

It can be. While hazing is typically a Class B misdemeanor, it becomes a state jail felony under Texas law if it causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals involved can face charges for committing the hazing, and even for failing to report it, depending on their role.

“Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”

Yes. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. The law recognizes that “agreement” under intense peer pressure, a significant power imbalance, and fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent.

“How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”

Generally, the statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death cases in Texas is two years from the date of injury or death. However, the “discovery rule” can extend this period if the harm or its cause was not immediately apparent. In cases involving cover-ups or deliberate concealment, the statute may be “tolled” (paused). Time is always critical – evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to discuss your specific timeline.

“What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”

The location of the hazing does not eliminate liability for the responsible parties. Universities and national fraternities/sororities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship of the organization, their knowledge of prior hazing, their failure to supervise, and the foreseeability of off-campus activities. Many major hazing cases that resulted in multi-million dollar judgments occurred off-campus (e.g., Pi Delta Psi’s retreat, Sigma Pi’s unofficial house).

“Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”

The Manginello Law Firm understands and prioritizes client privacy. While lawsuits are public records, most hazing cases settle confidentially before reaching a public trial. We can often negotiate for sealed court records and confidential settlement terms. We prioritize your family’s privacy interests while fiercely pursuing accountability.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family in City of Stafford faces the unimaginable pain and confusion of a hazing incident, you need more than just a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to overcome their defenses to achieve justice. You need a firm that knows how to hold universities, national fraternities, and individuals accountable—even when they hide behind legal technicalities and try to shift blame.

The Manginello Law Firm, operating as Attorney911, brings a unique and powerful combination of experience to hazing cases throughout Texas, including here in City of Stafford, Sugar Land, Missouri City, and across Fort Bend County and the Greater Houston area.

Our unique qualifications are especially critical in hazing litigation:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our Associate Attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable insight as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/). She understands precisely how university and fraternity insurance companies operate, how they value (and undervalue) hazing claims, and their common tactics for delaying, denying coverage, and minimizing payouts. We know their playbook because we used to run it.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Our Managing Partner, Ralph P. Manginello (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/), has extensive experience taking on some of the largest defendants. He was one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation and has a strong federal court background (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas). We are not intimidated by national fraternities, powerful universities, or their well-funded defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won. We know how to fight powerful defendants.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have 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 work with top economists to accurately value the loss of life and the immense costs of lifetime medical care for severe brain injuries or permanent disabilities. We don’t settle cheap. We build cases that force accountability and truly compensate for devastating losses.
• Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the prestigious Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) underscores our deep understanding of how criminal charges interact with civil litigation (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/). This dual perspective means we can advise victims and even former members on both criminal exposure and civil liability, offering a comprehensive legal strategy.
• Unmatched Investigative Depth: Winning hazing cases is about uncovering hidden truths. We utilize a vast network of experts—digital forensics specialists to recover deleted group chats and social media evidence, medical professionals, economists, and psychologists—to build an unassailable case. We know how to subpoena national fraternity records showing a pattern of prior incidents and how to compel universities to release internal files through discovery. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

At The Manginello Law Firm, we understand that this is one of the hardest things a family can face. Our approach is rooted in empathy and unwavering victim advocacy. We are not about bravado or quick settlements; we are about thorough investigation, strategic litigation, and achieving true accountability to prevent this from happening to another family.

If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus—whether the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor, or any other institution—we want to hear from you. Families in City of Stafford, Fort Bend County, and throughout the Greater Houston area and broader Texas have the right to answers and accountability.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm today for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We will listen to what happened, explain your legal options, and help you decide on the best path forward.

In your free consultation, you can expect:

• A non-judgmental environment where we listen to your story.
• An honest assessment of your potential claims.
• A clear explanation of your legal options for both criminal reporting and civil lawsuits.
• Discussion of realistic timelines and what to expect from the legal process.
• Answers to your questions about costs – we work on a contingency fee basis, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case. Learn more about how contingency fees work here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc.
• No pressure to hire us on the spot. Take the time you need to decide.
• Everything you share with us is protected by attorney-client confidentiality.

Whether you’re in City of Stafford or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone.

Call Attorney911 Today. We are the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

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

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

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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