Missouri Fraternity Hazing Attorneys | $50M+ National Settlements Exposed | Attorney911 — The Firm That Shut Down Pi Kappa Phi Beta Nu | Federal Court | Former Insurance Defense | 1-888-ATTY-911

We understand the profound impact that hazing can have, not just on the individual student, but on their entire family and community. That’s why we’ve leveraged our firm’s deep legal resources and extensive experience in complex litigation to create this comprehensive guide for families in Missouri and beyond. We are focused on providing clear, actionable information to help you navigate these challenging circumstances and understand your legal rights.

HOOK & EMERGENCY CALLOUT

The crisp autumn air held the scent of burning leaves as a promising young student from Chesterfield, Missouri, hugged their parents goodbye, ready to embark on their freshman year at a Texas university. They spoke excitedly about new friends, engaging classes, and the vibrant campus life. Weeks later, that excitement had dulled, replaced by a strange secrecy, late-night phone calls answered in hushed tones, and an uncharacteristic exhaustion. One evening, the student returned to their dorm, bruised and disheveled, vaguely referencing a “team-building exercise” that went too far. A knot of dread tightens in their parents’ stomachs; this wasn’t the college experience they had envisioned or prepared for.

This scenario, tragically, is far from uncommon. Even if you live in Missouri, the actions of fraternities, sororities, and other campus organizations at major Texas universities can directly impact your family. Whether your child attends the University of Missouri, Washington University in St. Louis, or one of the prominent institutions across the Lone Star State like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, or the University of Texas at Austin, the risks of hazing are real and pervasive. This detailed guide is meticulously crafted to empower Missouri families with the knowledge, context, and legal understanding necessary to prevent, identify, and address hazing.

This comprehensive guide to hazing and the law in Texas is written for families in Missouri and across Texas who need to understand:

• What hazing looks like in 2025, extending beyond the outdated stereotypes.
• How Texas and federal law address hazing, providing the legal framework for accountability.
• The critical lessons to be learned from major national hazing cases and their direct relevance to Texas families.
• The specific hazing landscapes at major Texas universities, including the University of Houston, Texas A&M, the University of Texas at Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor University.
• The legal options and pathways to justice available to victims and their families in Missouri and throughout Texas.

Even if your child attends school far from Missouri, Texas hazing law and experienced Texas counsel can help. This article is general information, not specific legal advice. The Manginello Law Firm can evaluate individual cases based on their specific facts. We serve families throughout Texas, including Missouri.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

• If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

• In the first 48 hours:

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

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

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

HAZING IN 2025: WHAT IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE

Hazing in 2025 has evolved far beyond the stereotypical “pranks” or isolated incidents. It is a complex, often secretive, and deeply entrenched problem that manifests in many forms, all designed to assert power, enforce conformity, and create a false sense of “belonging” through shared hardship. For Missouri families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or campus organizations, understanding these nuances is crucial. We define hazing as any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action—whether intentional, knowing, or reckless—tied to joining, keeping membership, or gaining status in a group, where the behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits. This definition broadens the scope beyond simple physical acts to include insidious psychological manipulation and digital coercion, ensuring that the full spectrum of harmful practices is addressed.

The false notion that “I agreed to it” somehow makes hazing acceptable or legal is dangerous. When there is an inherent power imbalance, intense peer pressure, or an underlying fear of social exclusion, an individual’s “consent” is not truly voluntary. Our legal system, and indeed our society, recognizes that consent under duress is not valid. The desire to belong, the fear of missing out, and the pressure of “tradition” can compel students to endure incredible hardships, blurring the lines of what they genuinely want versus what they feel forced to accept.

Main Categories of Hazing: Beyond the Stereotypes

Understanding the varied manifestations of hazing is the first step toward prevention and intervention.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains the most prevalent and deadliest form of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking, often through elaborate “games” or “rituals” designed to induce rapid and dangerous intoxication. This can include chugging challenges, “lineups” where new members must consume multiple drinks in quick succession, or “bottle exchanges” where dangerous amounts of hard liquor are distributed. Pledges may also be pressured to consume unknown substances or mixtures, putting their health and lives at extreme risk.

• Physical Hazing: Often seen as the most overt form, physical hazing encompasses direct bodily harm or extreme physical exertion. This includes paddling and beatings, extreme calisthenics or “workouts” that go far beyond healthy limits and are often punitive, and severe sleep or food/water deprivation. Students may be exposed to extreme cold or heat, denied access to bathrooms, or forced into dangerous environments, leading to exhaustion, injury, or illness.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This deeply damaging category involves acts designed to degrade and shame. It includes forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (often with derogatory names), degrading costumes, or activities with overt racial, homophobic, or sexist overtones. Such hazing not only causes profound psychological trauma but can also cross into sexual assault.

• Psychological Hazing: Often more insidious than physical acts, psychological hazing involves sustained verbal abuse, threats, manipulation, and social isolation. Victims may be subjected to constant criticism, forced confessions, public shaming (both in-person and online), and systematic efforts to break down their self-esteem and independence. This can lead to severe anxiety, depression, a sense of helplessness, and lasting emotional scars.

• Digital/Online Hazing: The rise of digital communication has introduced new, pervasive forms of hazing. This includes constant monitoring of group chats, often with demands for immediate responses at all hours, leading to sleep deprivation. New members may be subjected to dares, “challenges,” or public humiliation via social media platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and Discord. There is also increased pressure to create or share compromising images or videos, which can lead to extortion, reputational damage, and cyberbullying.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception that hazing is exclusively a “frat boy problem.” In reality, hazing transcends gender, race, and organizational type, embedding itself in various high-pressure environments where hierarchy and tradition are emphasized.

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes all Greek-letter organizations: Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic (NPC), National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations. While national headquarters have strict anti-hazing policies, rogue chapters or individual members often bypass them, particularly with the proliferation of “unofficial” houses and off-campus events.

• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: These organizations, particularly prevalent at institutions like Texas A&M University, often emphasize tradition, discipline, and a strict chain of command. Unfortunately, these elements can sometimes be twisted into abusive “initiation” practices, including physical exertion beyond safe limits, sleep deprivation, and psychological manipulation, often disguised as “training” or “rattling.”

• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs, and Student Organizations: From university cheerleading and dance teams to long-standing campus spirit groups and even some cultural or academic clubs, the desire for group cohesion can be exploited through hazing. “Tradition” is often cited as justification for practices that humiliate, endanger, or exclude new members.

• Athletic Teams: Hazing is rampant across high school and college sports, from football and basketball to swimming, soccer, and track. Practices can include forced alcohol consumption, “rookie duties,” physical abuse “to toughen them up,” or sexualized rituals. The intense bond required for team success can be a breeding ground for coercive behaviors, with victims fearing loss of their position or social ostracization if they speak out.

• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign organizations like marching bands, theater groups, or a cappella ensembles can fall victim to hazing. These instances often involve sleep deprivation, forced public embarrassment, or emotional manipulation, all framed as necessary for group unity or artistic discipline. The tragic death of Florida A&M drum major Robert Champion in 2011, following a brutal band hazing ritual, starkly illustrated this point.

At its core, hazing persists due to a dangerous combination of social status, a misguided interpretation of “tradition,” and a powerful culture of secrecy. New members, desperate to belong, often internalize the message that enduring abuse is a necessary rite of passage, while older members rationalize their actions by claiming “it’s what we went through” or “it builds character.” This cycle perpetuates harm, making it incredibly difficult for individuals to speak out without fear of severe social and personal repercussions.

LAW & LIABILITY FRAMEWORK (TEXAS + FEDERAL)

Navigating the legal landscape surrounding hazing requires a clear understanding of both state and federal laws, as well as the distinction between criminal and civil proceedings. For Missouri families whose children attend Texas universities, this framework is critical for pursuing justice and accountability.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has specific and comprehensive anti-hazing provisions outlined in the Texas Education Code, particularly Chapter 37, Subchapter F. Texas law broadly defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student, that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student, and occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

This definition is crucial because it covers:

• Location: Hazing can happen on or off campus; the physical location does not nullify its legal classification.
• Nature of Harm: It includes acts that endanger both physical health (like beating, forced exercise, forced consumption of alcohol or drugs) and mental health (such as extreme humiliation, intimidation, or psychological manipulation).
• Intent: The acts do not need to be malicious; “reckless” behavior—meaning the perpetrator knew or should have known of the substantial risk of harm—is sufficient for hazing to occur.
• “Consent” is not a defense: Explicitly, Texas law states that a person’s consent to engage in hazing activities does not serve as a defense in criminal prosecution or civil action. This recognizes the inherent power imbalance and peer pressure that often compel students to participate against their true will.

Criminal Penalties:

• Class B Misdemeanor: This is the default classification for most hazing offenses, carrying 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 that requires medical treatment, the charge can be elevated.
• State Jail Felony: Hazing becomes a state jail felony if it results in serious bodily injury or death. This carries more severe penalties, including incarceration in a state jail facility.
• Failure to Report: Officers or members who know of a hazing incident and fail to report it can also face misdemeanor charges.
• Retaliation: Retaliating against someone making a good-faith hazing report is also a criminal offense.

Organizational Liability: Texas law further states that organizations (like fraternities, sororities, clubs, or athletic teams) can be held criminally responsible if they authorized or encouraged the hazing, or if an officer or senior member, acting in an official capacity, knew about the hazing and failed to report it. Penalties for organizations can include fines of up to $10,000 per violation, and the university can revoke their recognition and ban them from campus. This provision underscores that accountability extends beyond individual bad actors to the institutions that enable or tacitly allow hazing to occur.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Two Paths to Justice

It is vital to understand that hazing incidents can lead to two distinct, though often intertwined, types of legal proceedings: criminal cases and civil cases.

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (prosecutors) against individuals or organizations accused of violating hazing laws. The primary goal of a criminal case is to punish the offender through incarceration, fines, or probation. In hazing contexts, common criminal charges can include:

  • Direct hazing offenses (misdemeanor or felony depending on severity).
  • Furnishing alcohol to minors.
  • Assault or aggravated assault.
  • In cases of death, charges such as negligent homicide or manslaughter may apply.
    A criminal conviction serves as a societal condemnation of the illegal act.

• Civil Cases: These are initiated by the victims of hazing or their surviving family members (in wrongful death cases) against individuals, organizations, and institutions whose negligence or intentional actions led to the harm. The core purpose of a civil case is to provide monetary compensation to the victim for their losses and suffering, and to hold responsible parties accountable. Civil claims in hazing cases often involve:

  • Negligence: Alleging failure to exercise reasonable care (e.g., failure to supervise, failure to enforce policies).
  • Gross Negligence: Alleging extreme lack of care, often with conscious indifference to risk.
  • Wrongful Death: Brought by the family when hazing results in a fatality. This is a critical area of our firm’s expertise.
  • Negligent Hiring/Supervision: Against an institution for failing to properly vet or oversee employees/advisors.
  • Premises Liability: Against property owners for unsafe conditions where hazing occurred.
  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: For extreme and outrageous conduct causing severe emotional trauma.
  • Assault and Battery: Even if a criminal case isn’t pursued or successful, civil claims can still be brought.

It is important to note that criminal and civil cases can proceed independently. A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for a successful civil lawsuit, and vice-versa. The standards of proof differ significantly (beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal, preponderance of evidence for civil).

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

Beyond state law, several federal mandates introduce an additional layer of accountability for colleges and universities.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation, recently enacted, requires colleges and universities receiving federal funding to be significantly more transparent about hazing incidents. By around 2026, these institutions will be mandated to:

  • Publicly report all hazing violations and related disciplinary actions.
  • Strengthen their hazing education and prevention programs.
  • Maintain and publish accessible hazing data, similar to existing crime reporting requirements under the Clery Act.
    This act aims to increase public awareness and pressure institutions to take more proactive measures to combat hazing.

• Title IX: This federal civil rights law prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based humiliation, or creates a hostile environment based on sex, Title IX obligations are triggered. Universities are then required to investigate, provide interim measures to protect victims, and take appropriate disciplinary action. Failure to do so can lead to federal investigation and loss of funding.

• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires institutions to disclose campus crime statistics, including those occurring on or near campus. While hazing is not a direct Clery crime category, many hazing incidents involve underlying crimes such as assault, liquor law violations, drug offenses, or sexual offenses, which must be reported under Clery. This provides a mechanism for tracking patterns and assessing an institution’s overall safety environment, which can be critical evidence in civil cases.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Holding responsible parties accountable often requires identifying multiple potential defendants due to the layered nature of organizational structures and varying degrees of responsibility.

• Individual Students: The students who actively planned, carried out, supplied alcohol, or encouraged the hazing acts are primary targets for liability. This includes those who stood by and failed to intervene, or who actively participated in cover-ups. In cases like Stone Foltz’s death, individual fraternity officers faced significant personal liability.

• Local Chapter / Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team as a recognized entity can be sued. This means that the assets of the local chapter (if it’s separately incorporated) and potentially the individuals holding leadership positions within that chapter can be held responsible.

• National Fraternity/Sorority: Most Greek-letter organizations are part of larger national or international bodies that set rules, collect dues, and often provide training and oversight to local chapters. National organizations can be held liable if:

  • They had knowledge of prior hazing incidents at the local chapter or other chapters nationwide (showing a pattern).
  • They failed to adequately enforce their “anti-hazing” policies or remove leaders who tolerated hazing.
  • They negligently supervised their local chapters.
    This “deep pocket” avenue is crucial for substantial recoveries.

• University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself, including its board of regents, may be a defendant. Liability here often hinges on proving:

  • Negligent Supervision: The university failed to adequately supervise student organizations or enforce its own anti-hazing policies despite knowing (or constructively knowing) about hazing risks.
  • Deliberate Indifference: In cases involving Title IX, the university showed deliberate indifference to known sexual harassment or assault within a hazing context.
  • Failure to Warn: The university failed to warn students or parents about known dangers associated with certain organizations.
    Public universities in Texas, such as the University of Houston, Texas A&M, and the University of Texas at Austin, benefit from aspects of sovereign immunity, which can make suing them more complex than suing private institutions like SMU or Baylor. However, there are significant exceptions to this immunity, particularly in cases of gross negligence, civil rights violations, or when individual employees are sued in their personal capacity.

• Third Parties: Depending on the circumstances, others may also be brought into a lawsuit:

  • Property Owners: Landlords or owners of off-campus houses, Airbnb rentals, or other venues where hazing occurred, especially if they knew about the activities or failed to ensure a safe environment.
  • Alcohol Providers: Bars, liquor stores, or individuals who illegally provided alcohol to minors participating in hazing.
  • Advisors/Coaches: Individual faculty advisors, coaches, or alumni who were present, knew about, or actively facilitated hazing, and failed to intervene.

Every hazing case is fact-specific, and the potential defendants can vary drastically. Our firm specializes in identifying all potential liable parties to ensure comprehensive accountability and maximum recovery for victims.

NATIONAL HAZING CASE PATTERNS (ANCHOR STORIES)

The landscape of hazing litigation is profoundly shaped by a series of tragic incidents that have not only led to significant legal precedents but have also galvanized legislative reform and public awareness. For Missouri families considering hazing issues at Texas universities, these national anchor cases provide critical context, illustrating patterns of abuse, the devastating consequences, and the mechanisms of accountability.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern: A Recurring Tragedy

Forced and excessive alcohol consumption remains the most common and deadliest form of hazing. These cases often share a chillingly similar script: young, eager pledges, desperate to belong, are pressured to drink dangerous amounts of alcohol, leading to fatal consequences.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): The 2017 death of Timothy Piazza at Penn State became a national outcry. During a bid-acceptance event, Piazza was forced to consume copious amounts of alcohol. He suffered multiple falls, captured on the fraternity’s own security cameras, resulting in catastrophic brain injuries. Fraternity members delayed calling 911 for nearly 12 hours, showcasing a horrific culture of cover-up over care. This case led to over a dozen criminal charges against fraternity members, comprehensive civil litigation, and the enactment of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania, a landmark piece of legislation. The takeaway for Texas: extreme intoxication, the tragic delay in calling 911, and a pervasive culture of silence are deeply rooted issues that lead to severe legal and personal consequences.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): In the same year, Andrew Coffey, a pledge at Florida State, died during a “Big Brother Night” ritual. He was given a handle of hard liquor and consumed it to dangerous levels, eventually dying of acute alcohol poisoning. Multiple criminal hazing charges were filed against fraternity members, and FSU temporarily suspended all Greek life, initiating a period of campus-wide policy overhaul. This case tragically highlights how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights consistently act as a dangerous script for disaster.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver’s death at LSU, also in 2017, occurred during a “Bible study” drinking game where pledges were forced to drink copious amounts of high-proof alcohol for incorrect answers. His blood-alcohol level was 0.495% at the time of his death. This tragedy spurred Louisiana to enact the Max Gruver Act, creating felony hazing charges for incidents involving serious injury or death. The clear lesson: legislative change frequently follows public outrage and undeniable proof of hazing’s devastating impact. His family later won a $6.1 million verdict.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): More recently, in 2021, Stone Foltz died after being forced to consume nearly an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” pledge night at Bowling Green State. This incident resulted in multiple criminal convictions for hazing-related offenses. Critically, Bowling Green State University, a public institution, settled with the Foltz family for nearly $3 million, and additional settlements were reached with the fraternity and individuals. The overarching lesson here is that universities, even public ones, can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities, especially when patterns of negligence are identified.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern: Violence Under the Guise of “Tradition”

Hazing often involves physical torment, frequently couched as “tradition” or “team building,” yet resulting in severe injury or death.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng’s death is a chilling example of ritualized physical hazing. At a remote fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains, Deng was blindfolded, forced to wear a weighted backpack, and repeatedly body-slammed during a brutal “glass ceiling” ritual. He sustained a traumatic brain injury. Tragically, members delayed calling 911 for an agonizing two hours, and even tried to cover up the incident. This case led to multiple criminal convictions, including a landmark verdict against the national fraternity itself for aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, and saw the fraternity permanently banned from operating in Pennsylvania for 10 years. The stark reality: off-campus “retreats” are often chosen precisely to conceal illegal hazing, but they do not shield national organizations or individuals from accountability.

• Danny Santulli – University of Missouri, Phi Gamma Delta (2021): While not a fatality, the case of Danny Santulli at the University of Missouri highlights the catastrophic, life-altering injuries that hazing can inflict. During a “pledge dad reveal” night, Santulli was forced to consume excessive alcohol and passed out. He suffered severe, permanent brain damage, leaving him unable to walk, talk, or see, and requiring 24/7 care. His family pursued lawsuits against 22 defendants, ultimately reaching multi-million-dollar settlements. This case serves as a powerful reminder that even when hazing isn’t fatal, the physical and emotional devastation can be profound and lifelong.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse: Beyond Greek Life

Hazing is not confined to Greek-letter organizations; it is a pervasive issue within many campus groups, including high-profile athletic programs.

• Northwestern University Football Scandal (2023–2025): Recent allegations against Northwestern University’s football program brought to light widespread sexualized and racist hazing over many years. Multiple former players filed lawsuits against the university and its coaching staff, detailing disturbing acts. The scandal ultimately led to the firing of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who later settled his wrongful-termination lawsuit confidentially with the university. This demonstrates unequivocally that hazing extends beyond Greek life, permeating major athletic programs and highlighting significant institutional oversight failures. It underscores that any group that fosters intense loyalty and a strict hierarchy can be vulnerable to hazing.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national cases, while geographically diverse, share common threads that are directly relevant to Missouri families whose children attend Texas universities: forced drinking, physical abuse, humiliation, deliberate delays in medical care, and systematic cover-ups. These elements create patterns of conduct that attorneys use to establish foreseeability and negligence in civil lawsuits.

• Foreseeability: When an organization has a history of incidents, whether at the local chapter or nationally, it becomes increasingly difficult for them to claim an incident was “unforeseeable.” Past tragedies create a clear duty for national organizations and universities to take preventative action. When similar incidents occur, it strongly indicates a failure to address known risks.

• Accountability: The multi-million-dollar settlements and verdicts in cases like Piazza, Gruver, Foltz, and Santulli prove that the legal system can compel significant financial accountability from individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and even universities. These recoveries reflect not just the immediate costs but the lifelong impact of hazing.

• Legislative Impact: These tragedies often become catalysts for stronger anti-hazing laws. Ohio’s “Collin’s Law” (named partly for Collin Wiant, who died in a hazing incident at Ohio University), Louisiana’s Max Gruver Act, and Pennsylvania’s Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law are direct results of families turning their grief into action. While Texas has strong anti-hazing laws, continuous advocacy and precedents from these national cases only strengthen arguments for accountability.

For Missouri families whose children are at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, these national lessons underscore one crucial point: you are not alone, and there is a well-established blueprint for pursuing justice when hazing turns tragic.

TEXAS FOCUS: UH, TEXAS A&M, UT, SMU, BAYLOR

For Missouri families, especially those from communities like Chesterfield, Ballwin, or St. Louis, who send their children to Texas universities, understanding the specific hazing landscapes at these institutions is paramount. Each major Texas university, while unique in its culture, grapples with hazing in different ways, reflecting varying levels of transparency, enforcement, and historical challenges. We will examine the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor University, providing context and relevant incidents.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

Many Missouri families, especially those seeking specific academic programs or a vibrant urban environment, consider the University of Houston for their children. Located in the heart of Houston, a bustling metropolis, UH offers a dynamic campus that blends residential life with a significant commuter population. Its Greek life is active and diverse, encompassing numerous fraternities and sororities under various councils, alongside a multitude of other student organizations and sports clubs. For Missouri students attending UH, Houston police and Harris County courts would generally hold jurisdiction in hazing-related incidents.

5.1.2 UH’s Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, clearly outlining prohibited behaviors whether they occur on-campus or off-campus. The policy explicitly forbids forced consumption of alcohol, drugs, or food, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and acts causing mental distress, especially when associated with initiation or maintaining membership. UH provides clear reporting channels through its Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). While UH does post a general hazing statement, the level of public detail regarding specific violations and sanctions can be more limited compared to some other large state universities. This can sometimes make it challenging for Missouri parents to research specific organizational histories.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at UH

Despite robust policies, UH has faced its share of hazing incidents, underscoring the ongoing challenge.

In 2016, a particularly serious case involving the Pi Kappa Alpha (PIKE) fraternity drew significant attention. Pledges were allegedly subjected to severe sleep and food deprivation during a multi-day event. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen, an acute physical injury that could have been fatal, after being forcefully impacted or slammed. The chapter eventually faced misdemeanor hazing charges and a university suspension, highlighting the severe physical dangers involved in hazing and UH’s willingness to act against offending chapters, albeit sometimes after significant harm has occurred.

More recently, the University of Houston became central to our firm’s work with the filing of a $10 million lawsuit on behalf of Leonel Bermudez against Pi Kappa Phi. As reported by Click2Houston, ABC13, and Hoodline, Bermudez, a transfer student and pledge of the Beta Nu chapter of Pi Kappa Phi, endured severe hazing in late 2025. This alleged hazing included forced physical exertion, degrading rituals such as carrying a humiliating “pledge fanny pack,” forced consumption of food and milk until vomiting, hose spraying “similar to waterboarding,” and grueling workouts at Yellowstone Boulevard Park. These activities led to acute kidney failure and rhabdomyolysis so severe that his “urine was brown,” as described by Attorney911’s Ralph Manginello. Bermudez was hospitalized for four days, and his long-term kidney health remains a concern. In response to these allegations, Pi Kappa Phi national headquarters suspended the Beta Nu chapter on November 6, 2025, and the chapter formally surrendered its charter on November 14, 2025. The lawsuit names the University of Houston and its Board of Regents, the national fraternity, its housing corporation, and 13 individuals as defendants. This case powerfully demonstrates Attorney911’s commitment to fighting serious hazing, and as Ralph Manginello stated, “We’re almost in 2026. This has to stop.”

These and other disciplinary actions for violations involving “mental or physical discomfort” or alcohol misuse show that UH actively, though sometimes reactively, addresses these issues. The repeated nature of violations, even with suspensions, suggests a persistent subculture that needs constant vigilance.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a hazing case originating at UH, several agencies and legal pathways could be involved. Criminal investigations typically fall under the jurisdiction of the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) for incidents on campus, or the Houston Police Department and Harris County Sheriff’s Office for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in Harris County civil courts. Potential defendants in such a case could include the individual students directly involved in the hazing, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and potentially the University of Houston and its Board of Regents, depending on the specifics of university knowledge and action. Property owners where off-campus hazing occurred may also be liable. For Missouri families, initiating legal action in Houston would involve attorneys familiar with these local jurisdictions and court systems.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

• Report Directly: Utilize UH’s reporting channels through the Dean of Students office or UHPD immediately if you suspect hazing.
• Document Everything: As demonstrated by the Bermudez case, detailed documentation is paramount. Screenshot all texts, group chats, images, and videos related to hazing. Photograph any injuries thoroughly, maintaining a detailed log of dates, times, and activities.
• Seek Medical Attention: Prioritize health. If the student experiences any physical or mental symptoms, seek medical care and explicitly state that hazing was involved to ensure accurate medical records.
• Understand the “Silent Oath”: Recognizing that secrecy is a core component of hazing, encourage your child to understand that their safety and well-being override any “secret oath” they may have taken.
• Contact an Experienced Houston-Based Hazing Lawyer: Attorneys with local experience are familiar with the specific nuances of UH investigations, Harris County legal proceedings, and how to effectively navigate challenges often posed by large institutional defendants, including the public university system. You’re not just fighting a local chapter; you’re often up against significant legal resources.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a storied institution frequently attended by students from Missouri seeking its unique traditional environment, presents a distinct hazing landscape, largely due to the pervasive influence of its Corps of Cadets and deeply rooted traditions. Located in College Station, approximately 100 miles northwest of Houston, A&M fosters a culture of loyalty and pride. Local cases would fall under the jurisdiction of College Station Police and Brazos County courts.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Missouri Connection)

Texas A&M is renowned for its strong traditions, particularly its Corps of Cadets, a military-style organization that shapes a significant portion of campus life. These traditions, while fostering camaraderie, can sometimes be fertile ground for hazing practices, which are often rationalized as “toughness” or “earning your place.” Families from Missouri, drawn to A&M’s reputation for leadership and service, must understand this often-intense cultural backdrop.

5.2.2 A&M’s Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

Texas A&M explicitly prohibits hazing, articulating a clear policy that emphasizes its illegality and the potential for severe consequences. The university’s student conduct code outlines reporting mechanisms through the Office of Student Conduct, commandants within the Corps, and the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD). While A&M maintains that hazing is not tolerated, the deep-seated nature of some traditions can make enforcement challenging, and many families report a complex process when navigating investigations.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at A&M

Texas A&M has faced multiple highly publicized hazing incidents over the years, both within its Greek system and the Corps of Cadets.

In 2021, the Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) fraternity at A&M was sued by pledges who alleged extreme hazing. These students claimed they were subjected to strenuous physical activity, had various substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, poured on them, resulting in severe chemical burns that necessitated skin graft surgeries. This incident led to a two-year university suspension for the fraternity and a $1 million lawsuit against SAE. This case vividly illustrates the dangerous combination of physical abuse and degrading rituals some organizations inflict.

Beyond Greek life, the Corps of Cadets has had its own hazing issues. A significant lawsuit in 2023 involved a cadet who alleged degrading and traumatic hazing rituals, including simulated sexual acts and being bound in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth between beds. This cadet sought over $1 million in damages, prompting the university to issue a statement that the matter had been addressed according to its internal rules. These incidents underscore that hazing at A&M is not confined to fraternities but can emerge within any highly traditional and hierarchical organization.

Another historical incident worth noting, though not traditional hazing, is the Aggie Bonfire collapse in 1999. While not initiated by a specific organization, it was a student-led tradition where 12 students died and 27 were injured. This tragic event, while distinct from hazing, highlighted the risks of high-risk student-led activities and the university’s oversight responsibilities, leading to over $6 million in settlements.

5.2.4 How an A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at Texas A&M, criminal investigations would typically involve College Station Police or Brazos County Sheriff’s Office, in cooperation with Texas A&M UPD. Civil lawsuits would generally proceed through Brazos County civil courts. Potential defendants could include individual students, the local chapter, the national organization (e.g., SAE national), and potentially Texas A&M University and its Board of Regents. Given A&M’s status as a public university, sovereign immunity defenses might be raised, but exceptions (such as for gross negligence or Title IX violations) can pierce this immunity.

5.2.5 What A&M Students & Parents Should Do

• Understand the Culture: Missouri families sending children to A&M should engage in open discussions about the unique blend of tradition and potential for abuse within certain organizations, particularly the Corps and Greek life.
• Document All Details: In an environment where “tradition” can blur with hazing, meticulous documentation is crucial. Any instance of forced activity, degradation, or endangerment must be recorded with screenshots, photos, and detailed personal notes.
• Report Through Multiple Channels: Utilize A&M’s reporting systems, but also consider external channels like the local police, particularly for severe physical or sexualized hazing.
• Prioritize Mental and Physical Health: Seek medical or counseling support immediately. Clearly state that hazing was involved to ensure accurate documentation that can be vital for any future legal action.
• Consult with an Experienced Hazing Attorney: Attorneys well-versed in handling cases against large public institutions like Texas A&M can navigate the complexities of sovereign immunity, extensive internal investigations, and local Brazos County legal procedures, ensuring rights are protected.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is another flagship institution that draws a significant number of Missouri students, particularly those seeking top-tier academic programs and a vibrant capital city experience. UT Austin is known for its sprawling campus, extensive Greek life, and numerous spirit organizations. Local incidents would typically fall under the jurisdiction of the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) or Austin Police Department, with civil cases proceeding in Travis County courts.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Missouri Connection)

UT Austin boasts one of the largest Greek systems in the nation, with diverse fraternities and sororities contributing to a lively campus social scene. Beyond Greek life, tradition and spirit are woven into various student organizations, from athletic support groups to renowned spirit associations like the Texas Cowboys. Missouri families must understand that while these groups foster strong loyalties, their traditions can sometimes include hazing practices. The visibility and impact of these organizations on campus life make them a significant area of focus for hazing prevention and enforcement.

5.3.2 UT’s Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

The University of Texas at Austin has a clear, no-tolerance anti-hazing policy that applies to all student organizations, whether officially recognized or not. UT’s policy aligns with Texas law, broadly defining prohibited acts that endanger mental or physical health. The university has established comprehensive reporting channels through its Dean of Students office, Student Conduct & Conflict Resolution, and UTPD.

Crucially, UT Austin maintains a public-facing Hazing Violations Log on its website, which lists organizations, the nature of their violations, and the sanctions imposed. This log serves as a valuable, though sometimes incomplete, resource for families and a precedent-setting mechanism for legal cases, allowing Missouri families to research organizational histories.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at UT

UT Austin’s transparency through its public Hazing Violations Log reveals a consistent pattern of incidents and the university’s responses.

For example, the Pi Kappa Alpha (PIKE) fraternity was sanctioned in 2023 after new members were directed to consume excessive amounts of milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, activities deemed illegal hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education. Such details, publicly available, are crucial for demonstrating patterns of behavior.

Historically, various UT spirit organizations have also faced hazing sanctions. The Texas Wranglers, for example, have repeatedly been cited for violations involving forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, and punishment-based practices designed to instill “discipline.” The Texas Cowboys faced disciplinary action related to hazing allegations in 2018. These incidents show that hazing is not exclusive to Greek life but is a challenge across various tradition-laden student groups.

The ongoing nature of violations, despite sanctions, highlights the persistent subculture of hazing that institutions like UT struggle to fully eradicate. These repeated incidents underscore the importance of robust legal action when a university’s internal discipline fails to prevent student harm.

5.3.4 How a UT Hazing Case Might Proceed

Criminal hazing investigations at UT Austin would involve either UTPD or the Austin Police Department, depending on the location of the incident, with charges filed through Travis County Attorney’s Office or District Attorney’s Office. Civil cases would be heard in Travis County civil courts. Potential defendants could include the individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially the University of Texas System and its Board of Regents. While UT benefits from sovereign immunity as a public institution, exceptions, particularly those related to civil rights violations or the gross negligence of individuals, can provide avenues for families to pursue justice. The public Hazing Violations Log can be instrumental evidence as it establishes a pattern of recognized misconduct by the university.

5.3.5 What UT Students & Parents Should Do

• Review the Hazing Log: Missouri families considering UT should review the university’s public Hazing Violations Log before joining any organization. This log can offer critical insights into an organization’s history.
• Exercise Vigilance: Monitor for any signs of physical or psychological distress, academic decline, or extreme secrecy. The “one day at a time” approach to hazing can be subtle but cumulatively devastating.
• Document & Report: Meticulously document any suspected hazing with dates, times, descriptions, and perpetrators. Report incidents to UT’s Dean of Students office or the UTPD. The anonymous option is always available, but for legal recourse, direct reporting is vital.
• Consult a Texas Hazing Lawyer: An attorney experienced in hazing litigation against large public universities can navigate the nuances of UT’s policies, access relevant public records, and effectively challenge sovereign immunity defenses to build a strong case for accountability.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

For Missouri families considering a private university experience in Texas, Southern Methodist University (SMU) in Dallas often emerges as a top choice. Known for its picturesque campus, strong academics, and vibrant social scene, SMU also has a prominent Greek life that has, at times, faced scrutiny regarding hazing. Incidents on campus would generally involve SMU Police and student conduct processes, while off-campus issues might fall to the Dallas Police Department, with civil cases handled in Dallas County courts.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Missouri Connection)

SMU’s student body reflects a national and international presence, including students from Missouri drawn to its prestigious programs. The university’s culture is characterized by a high degree of student engagement in numerous organizations, with Greek life playing a particularly influential role in social activities. The concentration of Greek organizations, coupled with a strong emphasis on tradition, can sometimes create an environment where hazing is secretly perpetuated.

5.4.2 SMU’s Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

SMU maintains a strict anti-hazing policy that is clearly communicated to all students and student organizations. The policy defines prohibited behaviors in accordance with Texas law and mandates clear reporting channels through the Office of the Dean of Students, Student Affairs, and SMU Police Department. The university utilizes prevention programs and an anonymous reporting system (e.g., Real Response) to encourage students to come forward. As a private institution, SMU typically handles disciplinary actions internally, and its records of violations may not be as publicly transparent as those of state-funded universities, making internal records crucial for litigation.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at SMU

SMU has taken action against various Greek organizations for hazing violations, leading to suspensions and loss of recognition.

A notable incident in 2017 involved the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity, which was suspended following allegations of hazing that included paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and extreme sleep deprivation of new members. The chapter faced an extended period of suspension from campus, with restrictions on recruiting that extended for several years. Such incidents underscore the persistent nature of hazing despite clear university prohibitions.

While SMU’s records of hazing violations are not as readily available in a public, centralized log like UT Austin’s, internal investigations and disciplinary actions are consistently taken when reports are substantiated. Our firm’s experience with similar private institutions indicates that a pattern of these internal sanctions, even if not widely publicized, can be highly relevant evidence in civil litigation, demonstrating the university’s awareness of ongoing issues.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at SMU, criminal matters would be handled by SMU Police or Dallas Police, resulting in charges filed through the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office. Civil cases would typically be heard in Dallas County civil courts. Potential defendants would likely include the individual students involved, the local chapter, and the national organization. As a private institution, SMU generally does not have the same sovereign immunity protections as public Texas universities, which can simplify some aspects of civil litigation against the university, allowing for more direct claims of negligent supervision or failure to protect students.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

• Utilize Anonymous Reporting: Missouri students at SMU feeling coerced or witnessing hazing should use the anonymous reporting systems available to them, as this can trigger an internal investigation without immediate personal risk.
• Seek Mental Health Support: The psychological toll of hazing is severe. SMU’s counseling services should be utilized, and discussions with a mental health professional can provide crucial documentation for potential legal claims.
• Understand Private vs. Public University Dynamics: Missouri parents should be aware that while private universities may have different internal processes for handling hazing, they are still obligated to provide a safe environment. Legal strategies against private institutions differ from public ones in terms of immunity.
• Contact a Dallas-Based Hazing Lawyer: An attorney experienced in civil litigation against private universities and national Greek organizations in the Dallas area can effectively initiate discovery to uncover internal university and chapter records, identify patterns of negligence, and pursue appropriate compensation.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Baptist university in Waco, Texas, is another institution that attracts Missouri families. Known for its strong academic reputation and faith-based community, Baylor has faced unique challenges related to student conduct and institutional oversight, including hazing, particularly in the context of its athletic programs and student organizations. Criminal proceedings would involve Waco Police and McLennan County courts, with civil actions adjudicated in McLennan County.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Missouri Connection)

Baylor University holds a distinctive position among Texas universities due to its religious affiliation and unique campus culture. Students from Missouri seeking a values-driven education often find Baylor appealing. While Greek life and other student organizations play a role in social life, Baylor’s culture also emphasizes its Christian mission. This context, however, does not make it immune to hazing; rather, it often adds layers of complexity, as internal investigations may be influenced by a desire to maintain institutional reputation.

5.5.2 Baylor’s Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

Baylor University maintains a “zero tolerance” policy for hazing, emphasizing its incompatibility with the university’s mission and values. The policy defines hazing broadly and strictly prohibits it. Reporting channels are provided through the Office of Student Conduct, the Baylor Police Department, and various confidential reporting avenues. Given Baylor’s history of high-profile scandals, including those related to sexual assault and TitleIX violations within its football program, the university operates under intense scrutiny to ensure compliance with federal and state mandates for student safety and conduct. This history means Baylor often approaches campus misconduct with heightened, though sometimes criticized, internal processes.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at Baylor

Baylor’s commitment to “zero tolerance” has been tested by various incidents, particularly within its athletic programs and student groups.

A significant event occurred in 2020 when the Baylor baseball team faced a hazing scandal. Following an internal investigation, 14 players were suspended, with suspensions staggered over the early season to mitigate the impact on the team. While specific details of the hazing acts were not publicly disclosed, the large number of suspensions indicated a pervasive issue within the program. This incident underscored that hazing is not limited to fraternities and sororities but can be deeply embedded within athletic teams, even those at institutions with strong moral codes.

Baylor’s experiences, particularly its past handling of sexual assault cases connected to its football program, highlight a broader pattern of institutional challenges in student safety oversight. While not hazing per se, these prior scandals demonstrate the university’s struggle with ensuring accountability, even when formal policies are in place. This background is relevant for Missouri families, as it indicates the potential for complex institutional responses when student misconduct, including hazing, comes to light.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For hazing incidents at Baylor University, criminal investigations would involve the Baylor Police Department or Waco Police, with charges issued by the McLennan County District Attorney’s Office. Civil lawsuits would typically be heard in McLennan County civil courts. Potential defendants would include the individual students, the local organization, and potentially Baylor University itself. As a private institution, Baylor does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it more susceptible to certain types of civil claims compared to public universities like UT or Texas A&M. However, its significant resources and defense teams necessitate experienced legal counsel.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

• Prioritize Reporting: Missouri students and parents should use Baylor’s established reporting mechanisms without delay. Early reporting is key to triggering internal investigations and preserving evidence.
• Document All Details: Maintain meticulous records of hazing incidents, including dates, times, locations, individuals involved, and specific acts. Digital evidence (screenshots, photos) is particularly vital.
• Understand Institutional History: Be aware of Baylor’s past challenges with institutional oversight and its impact on student safety. This history provides context for evaluating the university’s response to hazing allegations.
• Seek External Legal Counsel: Given Baylor’s resources and the potential for previous institutional issues, consulting a Waco-based or Texas hazing attorney with specific experience litigating against well-resourced private universities is crucial. This ensures an independent investigation and advocacy for the victim’s rights outside internal university processes.

FRATERNITIES & SORORITIES: CAMPUS-SPECIFIC + NATIONAL HISTORIES

For Missouri families, understanding the national context of fraternities and sororities, alongside local chapter conduct at Texas universities, is vital. It highlights how repeated patterns of hazing across different campuses can establish foreseeability and strengthen claims of institutional negligence.

6.1 Why National Histories Matter

Many fraternities and sororities active at Texas campuses—including UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor—are part of larger national or international organizations. These national entities play a dual role: they set policies and standards for their local chapters, but they also bear responsibility when those chapters engage in harmful hazing.

Here’s why their national histories are so critical in hazing litigation:

• Foreseeability: National headquarters often have extensive anti-hazing manuals and risk management policies precisely because they have faced numerous hazing incidents, including deaths and catastrophic injuries, at chapters across the country. When a Texas chapter engages in conduct similar to hazing that occurred years ago at another state’s chapter, it becomes incredibly difficult for the national organization to claim they “had no idea” such a thing could happen. This establishes foreseeability, a cornerstone of negligence claims.
• Pattern Evidence: Recurring hazing methods—whether it’s forced drinking, physical abuse, or humiliating rituals—demonstrate a systemic problem. Lawyers can use pattern evidence from other chapters to argue that the national organization failed to adequately train, supervise, and discipline its local chapters, or that its corporate culture implicitly tolerated the behaviors.
• Institutional Memory: National organizations collect information about chapter behavior, including disciplinary actions. This “institutional memory” means they often have records of prior warnings, complaints, or compliance issues related to hazing. These records are invaluable in proving that the national entity had notice and failed to act.
• Deterrence: Successful litigation against national organizations often leads to stricter enforcement, more effective prevention programs, and tangible changes in how fraternities and sororities operate nationwide.

When a Texas chapter repeats a dangerous script that led to injuries or death at another chapter in a different state, it’s not an isolated incident. Instead, it strongly supports claims of negligence or even gross negligence against the national entity, potentially increasing settlement leverage and the possibility of punitive damages. Attorney911 meticulously investigates these national histories to build the strongest possible case for our Texas clients.

6.2 Organization Mapping: Specific Examples of National Patterns

While each local chapter is unique, the pervasive nature of hazing means certain national organizations appear repeatedly in incident reports and lawsuits. Below are examples of fraternities with publicly documented national hazing patterns, illustrating why their national histories matter to Texas families.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (PIKE): Nationally, Pi Kappa Alpha has faced multiple hazing-related lawsuits and tragedies. The most prominent is the 2021 death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University, where a pledge died from alcohol poisoning during a forced drinking ritual. Families in Missouri should know that a PIKE chapter at the University of Texas at Austin was sanctioned in 2023 for hazing involving milk consumption and strenuous calisthenics. This pattern of dangerous alcohol and physical hazing across chapters points to deeply rooted issues within PIKE and highlights a national-level foreseeability for such incidents.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): Often dubbed “America’s deadliest fraternity” by media outlets such as Bloomberg News, Sigma Alpha Epsilon has a tragic national history of hazing-related deaths and severe injuries. Notably, SAE suspended its traditional pledging process in 2014 in an attempt to curb these incidents, a move that highlights the severity of its past. Despite this, SAE chapters continue to face allegations. For instance, a traumatic brain injury lawsuit (2023) was filed against an SAE chapter at the University of Alabama following an alleged hazing ritual. In Texas, an SAE chapter at Texas A&M University faced a $1 million lawsuit in 2021 (as well as a two-year suspension) for chemical burns sustained by pledges during alleged hazing that involved industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. These events, occurring even after national reforms, underscore the deep-seated nature of hazing patterns.

• Phi Delta Theta (Phi Delt): This fraternity has also been involved in high-profile hazing cases nationally. The tragic 2017 death of Maxwell “Max” Gruver at Louisiana State University, resulting from extreme alcohol consumption during a “Bible study” hazing ritual, directly led to Louisiana’s felony hazing statute, the Max Gruver Act. The victim’s family later won a $6.1 million verdict against individual defendants, and the national fraternity later settled with the family for an undisclosed sum. This case, like many involving Phi Delt, underscores the dangers of forced drinking and pseudo-intellectual hazing games.

• Pi Kappa Phi (Pi Kapp): Another fraternity with a documented national pattern of hazing. The 2017 death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University, caused by acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night,” is a somber reminder of the risks associated with forced drinking rituals. In Texas, our firm represents Leonel Bermudez in a $10 million lawsuit against Pi Kappa Phi at the University of Houston, alleging severe rhabdomyolysis and kidney failure due to physical and degrading hazing. These incidents demonstrate a concerning consistency in dangerous practices across Pi Kapp chapters nationally.

• Kappa Alpha Order (KA): Historically associated with “Old South” traditions, Kappa Alpha Order has also faced numerous hazing allegations and sanctions. At SMU, a chapter was suspended in 2017 for hazing involving paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and sleep deprivation. Such incidents highlight that “tradition” can often mask dangerous and illegal hazing, directly impacting Missouri students who may pledge chapters at Texas universities.

• Sigma Nu (ΣΝ): This national fraternity has faced scrutiny for hazing activities. A 1980 incident at the University of South Carolina involved the alcohol-related death of pledge L. Barry Ballou, who choked to death after a ritualized drinking session. In Missouri, Sigma Nu at the University of Missouri was involved in the 1940 death of Hubert L. Spake, due to alcohol. The consistency of these alcohol-related incidents across its history and chapters points to a pattern that national organizations are expected to address.

• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Sigma Chi’s national history includes significant hazing incidents and litigation. A prominent case involved a chapter at the College of Charleston, where a pledge alleged physical beatings, forced consumption of drugs and alcohol, and severe psychological torment. The family received more than $10 million in damages, one of the largest known hazing settlements, underscoring the severe consequences of physical and psychological abuse. A pattern of significant physical, life-altering hazing is present across chapters of Sigma Chi. For Missouri families, Sigma Chi at the University of Texas was involved in the 2024 death of Sawyer Updike, a suicide blamed by parents on hazing.

• Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ): As an NPHC fraternity, Omega Psi Phi has faced allegations of physical hazing. In 2023, former University of Southern Mississippi student Rafeal Joseph alleged severe beatings with a wooden paddle during “Hell Night,” leading to emergency surgery and months of rehabilitation. Joseph filed a federal lawsuit against the university and the fraternity, alleging similar incidents have taken place across chapters nationally. For Missouri families, Omega Psi Phi at Tennessee State University had two hazing deaths (1983 and 2001) associated with physical “exercise sessions,” demonstrating a pattern in this national organization.

6.3 Tie Back to Legal Strategy

The cumulative weight of these national hazing histories significantly impacts legal strategy in civil lawsuits in Texas. Our firm argues that:

• Prior Warnings: If other chapters of a national fraternity have been disciplined or sued for similar hazing, the national organization can no longer claim “ignorance” or that an incident was “unforeseeable.” They had prior warnings, creating a duty to act.
• Failure to Enforce: The existence of anti-hazing policies, while important, is insufficient if the national organization fails to meaningfully enforce them. We investigate whether nationals conducted effective oversight, responded adequately to past violations, or truly educated chapters on risk management.
• Establishing Gross Negligence: Repeated patterns of dangerous hazing practices can elevate claims from simple negligence to gross negligence, which opens the door for higher damages, including punitive damages in some jurisdictions. Punitive damages are designed to punish reckless behavior and deter future misconduct.

By meticulously researching the hazing history of national organizations, Attorney911 builds a robust case that connects local incidents at Texas universities to a broader, national pattern of negligence and institutional failure. This approach is critical for imposing accountability, driving real change, and securing comprehensive compensation for Missouri families affected by hazing.

BUILDING A CASE: EVIDENCE, DAMAGES, STRATEGY

For Missouri families pursuing a hazing lawsuit in Texas, success hinges on a thorough investigation, meticulous evidence collection, and a strategic legal approach. Unlike typical personal injury cases, hazing claims involve uncovering hidden activities, challenging powerful institutions, and navigating complex legal terrain. The Manginello Law Firm specializes in this intricate process.

7.1 Evidence: Unmasking the Hidden Truth

Hazing thrives in secrecy, but modern technology has created new avenues for revealing the truth. Collecting and preserving evidence immediately after an incident is paramount, as critical information can quickly be deleted, altered, or lost.

• Digital Communications: In 2025, digital communications are often the most vital source of evidence.

  • Group Messaging Apps: Platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage/SMS group texts, Discord servers, and even private fraternity/sorority apps are common tools for organizing hazing. These apps often contain direct orders, humiliating messages, plans for events, and discussions of punishments. Screenshots are critical, and should capture the full thread, sender names, and timestamps. For apps with disappearing messages (e.g., Snapchat), immediate screenshots or screen recordings are essential. Our firm works with digital forensics experts to recover deleted messages from devices and cloud backups where possible.
  • Social Media: Posts, stories, DMs, photos, and videos on Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and Facebook can inadvertently—or intentionally—document hazing. These may show victims in degrading situations, forced activities, or injuries. Even “funny” posts made under duress can serve as evidence. Location tags and timestamps are also crucial.

• Photos & Videos: Beyond digital communications, media captured by participants or bystanders offers undeniable proof.

  • Content Filmed by Members: Victims or witnesses may have captured hazing in progress or its aftermath. This unvarnished footage is extremely powerful.
  • Security Camera Footage: Surveillance cameras at houses, university facilities, or off-campus venues can capture key moments before, during, or after an incident. This includes Ring doorbell footage. Timely requests are vital before footage is overwritten.

• Internal Organization Documents: These provide insight into the hazing culture and the organization’s knowledge.

  • Pledge Manuals/Scripts: Even if sanitized, these can give clues about expectations and “traditions.”
  • Communications about Pledges: Emails or texts from officers discussing “new member” activities, particularly if they use euphemisms for hazing.
  • National Policies: The national fraternity/sorority’s anti-hazing policies and risk management materials, which often outline the very acts being committed locally.

• University Records: These reveal the institution’s awareness and response.

  • Prior Conduct Files: Records of past hazing violations, probations, or suspensions involving the same organization. For UT Austin, the public Hazing Violations Log (hazing.utexas.edu) is a starting point, but deeper records often require discovery.
  • Incident Reports: Formal reports filed with campus police (e.g., UHPD, UTPD), student conduct offices, or Title IX coordinators.
  • Clery Reports: Annual crime statistics that can show patterns of alcohol violations, assaults, or other crimes often associated with hazing.

• Medical and Psychological Records: These substantiate the harm suffered.

  • Emergency Room/Hospital Records: Document injuries, diagnoses (e.g., rhabdomyolysis in the Bermudez case), toxicology reports (blood alcohol levels), and the patient’s account of how injuries occurred. Crucially, the records should explicitly state that hazing was involved as the cause.
  • Surgery/Rehab Notes: Detail ongoing treatment and recovery.
  • Psychological Evaluations: Clinical diagnoses of PTSD, depression, anxiety, or other trauma-related conditions resulting from hazing. These are essential for proving long-term emotional distress.

• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts breathe life into the evidence.

  • Other Pledges: Often the most direct witnesses, though many are reluctant to speak due to fear of retaliation.
  • Roommates, Friends, RAs: Individuals who noticed changes in behavior, injuries, or odd demands on the victim.
  • Former Members: Those who have left the organization, especially due to hazing, can provide critical insight into the chapter’s history and practices.

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, a skill invaluable given the prevalence of digital evidence in hazing cases.

7.2 Damages: Compensating for Profound Harm

The purpose of a civil hazing lawsuit is to secure fair compensation for the immense physical, emotional, and financial harm inflicted upon victims and their families. This compensation falls into several categories:

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This covers all costs associated with diagnosis, treatment, and ongoing care.

  • Past Expenses: Emergency room visits, ambulance transport, hospital stays (including ICU, surgery), medications, and medical equipment.
  • Future Medical Needs: For severe injuries like traumatic brain injury (TBI) or acute kidney failure, this includes long-term physical, occupational, and psychological therapy, future surgeries, and specialized medical equipment. In catastrophic cases, a “life care plan” can be developed by experts to project lifelong costs.

• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: Hazing can severely derail a student’s academic and professional trajectory.

  • Lost Earnings: If the victim or a parent (who had to leave work to care for the victim) lost wages.
  • Educational Setbacks: Costs for missed semesters, lost scholarships (academic, athletic, or Greek-based), delayed graduation, and the subsequent delay in entering the workforce.
  • Diminished Earning Capacity: In cases of permanent injury or psychological trauma affecting the ability to work, economists can project the lifetime loss of earning potential.

• Non-Economic Damages: These address the non-monetary, yet often most profound, losses.

  • Physical Pain & Suffering: The actual pain endured from injuries and any ongoing pain from permanent conditions.
  • Emotional Distress & Trauma: Humiliation, degradation, fear, anxiety, depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and other psychological harms. This includes the profound emotional impact on parents and siblings.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: The inability to participate in activities previously enjoyed, social withdrawal, damage to relationships, and the overall diminishment of the college experience.
  • Reputational Harm: If hazing leads to public scrutiny or makes it difficult for a student to pursue educational or career goals.

• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): When hazing results in a fatality, Missouri families can pursue a wrongful death claim in Texas. This category of damages seeks to compensate the surviving family members for their profound loss. Our firm has extensive wrongful death experience (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/).

  • Funeral and Burial Costs: Direct expenses related to the death.
  • Loss of Financial Support: Compensation for financial contributions the deceased would have made to the family.
  • Loss of Companionship, Love, and Society: The invaluable, non-economic losses suffered by parents, spouses, and children due to the absence of the deceased.
  • Grief and Emotional Suffering: Direct compensation for the immense emotional pain and suffering of the surviving family members.

• Punitive Damages: In cases where the defendant’s conduct was grossly negligent, reckless, or malicious, punitive damages may be awarded. These are not intended to compensate the victim but to punish the wrongdoer and deter similar conduct in the future. In Texas, punitive damages can be capped in many cases but remain a powerful tool to compel accountability.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Hazing litigation often targets multiple defendants, each with their own legal counsel and potentially their own insurance policies.

• Insurance Coverage Dynamics: National fraternities, sororities, and universities typically carry extensive insurance policies. However, insurers often attempt to deny coverage for hazing claims, arguing that “intentional acts” or “criminal conduct” are excluded from their policies.
• Navigating Insurance Disputes: This is where the expertise of a firm like Attorney911 is critical. Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) is invaluable. We understand how insurers interpret policy language, how they value claims, and their tactics for avoiding payouts. We diligently work to identify all potential insurance carriers—including umbrella policies, directors’ and officers’ liability, and individual homeowners’ policies—and aggressively challenge wrongful denials of coverage.
• Piercing Defenses: By framing the claims around negligent supervision, negligent retention, or failure to enforce policies (rather than solely intentional acts), we can often compel insurers to defend and indemnify their clients. This sophisticated understanding of insurance law ensures that all available resources are brought to bear on behalf of our clients.

Building a comprehensive case in hazing litigation requires legal acumen, investigative resources, and a deep understanding of the unique challenges these cases present. Our firm is prepared to meet these challenges head-on.

PRACTICAL GUIDES & FAQS

When hazing impacts a family in Missouri or their child attending a Texas university, immediate action and clear information are critical. This section provides practical guidance for parents, students, and witnesses, along with answers to common questions about Texas hazing law.

8.1 For Parents: Your Role in Recognizing and Responding

Parents are often the first to notice subtle, yet concerning, changes in their children. Trust your instincts.

• Warning Signs of Hazing:

  • Unexplained Injuries: Look for bruises, cuts, or sprains that your child can’t explain convincingly, or that seem inconsistent with their stories.
  • Extreme Fatigue & Exhaustion: Persistent tiredness, falling asleep at unusual times, or frequent complaints about lack of sleep.
  • Drastic Mood Changes: Observe sudden anxiety, irritability, depression, or emotional withdrawal.
  • Increased Secrecy: Your child becomes unusually secretive about their organization’s activities, often using phrases like “I can’t talk about it” or “You wouldn’t understand.”
  • Constant Phone Monitoring: Anxious anticipation of group chat messages or demands for immediate responses, often at odd hours.
  • Academic Decline: A sudden drop in grades, missed classes, or disinterest in studies due to organizational commitments.
  • Loss of Interest: Withdrawing from hobbies, friends outside the organization, or activities they once enjoyed.

• How to Talk to Your Child:

  • Approach with Empathy: Start with open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with your group?” rather than accusations.
  • Reassure Support: Emphasize that their safety and well-being are your top priority, not their membership in an organization. Let them know you will support them no matter what.
  • Set Clear Boundaries: Communicate that you will not tolerate activities that endanger their health, humiliate them, or require them to break the law.

• If Your Child is Hurt:

  • Seek Immediate Medical Care: Your child’s health is paramount. Take them to an urgent care clinic or emergency room, and explicitly tell medical staff that the injuries or condition are hazing-related.
  • Document Everything: Take clear photos of all injuries from multiple angles and over several days. Write down everything your child tells you about the incident: dates, times, locations, names of individuals involved, and specific acts of hazing.
  • Preserve Digital Evidence: If your child shows you any texts, group chat messages, or social media content, screenshot them immediately. This evidence can disappear rapidly.

• Dealing with the University:

  • Document Communications: Keep detailed records of every phone call, email, or meeting with university officials. Note who you spoke with, what was discussed, and what actions were promised.
  • Ask Direct Questions: Inquire about the organization’s prior disciplinary history, any previous hazing violations, and the university’s specific actions to monitor and prevent hazing.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: Contact Attorney911 for a confidential evaluation if your child sustains significant physical or psychological harm, if you suspect the university or organization is minimizing or covering up the incident, or if you feel pressured to sign documents without full understanding.

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

If you’re a student in Missouri pledging at a Texas university, your experience may be exhilarating, frightening, or a combination of both. Here’s how to navigate potential hazing.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition?: Ask yourself these tough questions:

  • Am I being forced or pressured to do something I genuinely don’t want to do?
  • Would I do this activity if there were no social consequences or fear of being “cut”?
  • Does this activity involve physical pain, humiliation, emotional distress, or put my safety at risk?
  • Am I being told to keep secrets from family, friends, or the university?
  • Are older members making new members do things they themselves don’t have to do?
    If you answered yes to any of these, it’s likely hazing. True camaraderie and bonding should not come at the cost of your dignity, health, or safety.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Organizations may claim activities are “voluntary” or that you “consented.” However, because of power imbalances, peer pressure, and the desire to belong, Texas law explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing charges. You have a legal right to expect a safe environment, regardless of your initial “agreement.”

• Exiting and Reporting Safely:

  • If in Immediate Danger: Prioritize your safety. Call 911 immediately if you are injured, severely intoxicated, sexually assaulted, or feel physically threatened. You won’t get in trouble for seeking help.
  • Decide to De-Pledge: You have the absolute right to leave any organization at any time. You do not need “permission.” Communicate your decision via email or text (creating a record) and avoid “exit interviews” where you might be pressured or intimidated.
  • Report Hazing: Utilize your university’s anonymous reporting hotlines, or directly contact the Dean of Students office or campus police. Texas law provides protections for those who report hazing.

• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Texas law (and most university policies) includes provisions for good-faith reporting. This means if you are involved in a hazing incident or witness one, and you call 911 for medical help, you typically cannot be criminally prosecuted for certain minor offenses (like underage drinking) that might have also occurred. Your priority should always be saving a life.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses: Your Voice Matters

If you’ve witnessed hazing or participated in it in the past, your unique perspective can be crucial to preventing future tragedies and holding wrongdoers accountable.

• Preventing Future Harm: Your testimony and any evidence you possess could be the key to supporting a victim’s case, shutting down dangerous organizations, and saving lives.
• Navigating Legal Implications: We understand you might fear personal legal repercussions. Consulting with an attorney is paramount. We can advise you on your rights and obligations, and how to safely cooperate with investigations or litigation. Texas criminal defense lawyers (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/) like Ralph Manginello can guide you. While you may have been complicit in hazing acts, your cooperation, especially if you were pressured or coerced yourself, can be viewed favorably.
• Offering Support: Reach out privately to a hazing victim or their family. Share your experiences, particularly if you’ve witnessed past hazing by the same organization. This information could be invaluable evidence.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

In the emotional aftermath of hazing, families often make innocent mistakes that can unintentionally undermine a strong legal case. Avoid these critical errors. For more insight, watch Attorney911’s video on client mistakes that can ruin your injury case: 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: Deleting evidence looks like a cover-up, makes your case nearly impossible to prove, and can even be an obstruction of justice.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately – screenshots, photos, texts, social media posts – even if it feels embarrassing.

2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority or University Directly:

   • What families think: “I need to tell them exactly what happened and what I think.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This often triggers a defensive response, leading them to quickly destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their legal defenses.
   • What to do instead: Document everything meticulously, then contact an attorney before any direct confrontation. All further communication should ideally go through your legal counsel.

3. Signing Any University “Release” or “Resolution” Forms:

   • What universities often do: Pressure families to sign waivers, “internal resolution” agreements, or non-disclosure agreements.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your child’s legal rights to sue for damages, and any settlement offered at this stage is almost certainly a lowball offer.
   • What to do instead: Absolutely do NOT sign any document from the university or organization without an experienced attorney reviewing it first.

4. Posting Details on Social Media Before Consulting a Lawyer:

   • What families think: “I want to share our story and warn others.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Defense attorneys will screenshot everything. Inconsistencies or inflammatory statements can hurt your credibility, and you might accidentally disclose privileged information or evidence prematurely.
   • What to do instead: Document privately. Your attorney will help you craft a strategic communication plan.

5. Letting Your Child Attend “One Last Meeting” with the Organization:

   • What organizations claim: “Let’s talk this out before you do anything drastic.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This is often a tactic to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can later be used against your case, or simply to gauge what you know.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication with the organization should cease and go through your attorney.

6. Waiting Indefinitely “To See How the University Handles It”:

   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating, let us manage this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Valuable evidence disappears, witnesses graduate and disperse, and statutes of limitations continue to run. The university’s internal process prioritizes its own interests, not necessarily your child’s full recovery or legal rights.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence immediately and consult a lawyer. The university’s internal process is separate from genuine legal accountability.

7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer:

   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim quickly.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Insurance adjusters work for the insurance company, not for you. They aim to minimize payouts, and your recorded statement can be used against you. Early settlement offers are almost always significantly undervalued.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and state, “My attorney will contact you.”

8.5 Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities (like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, and UT Austin) have some sovereign immunity protections, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, civil rights violations like Title IX, and when suing individuals in their personal capacity. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections. Every case is unique and depends on specific facts. Contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It can be. While Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default, it becomes a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individual officers and members can also face criminal charges for failing to report hazing or for their direct involvement in criminal acts during hazing.

• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
  Yes. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing in civil or criminal proceedings. Legal precedent recognizes that true voluntary consent cannot be given when an individual is under duress, coercion, or immense peer pressure within a power-imbalanced initiation process.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  In Texas, you generally have 2 years from the date of the injury or death to file a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit. However, this period can sometimes be extended by the “discovery rule” if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known. In cases involving deliberate cover-ups or fraud, the statute of limitations may be “tolled” (paused). Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to discuss your specific timeline. For more information, watch our video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of the hazing does not automatically negate liability. Universities and national fraternities/sororities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship of the organization, their knowledge of off-campus activities, their failure to supervise, and the foreseeability of hazing activities occurring regardless of location. Many major hazing cases resulting in multi-million-dollar judgments have occurred off-campus.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  Most hazing lawsuits, particularly those involving sensitive personal details, settle confidentially before going to trial. Our firm prioritizes your family’s privacy interests while still aggressively pursuing accountability. We can discuss strategies for seeking sealed court records and confidential settlement terms.

ABOUT THE MANGINELLO LAW FIRM + CALL TO ACTION

When your family faces a hazing case, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, we are the Legal Emergency Lawyers™ specializing in complex litigation, serious personal injury, and wrongful death cases, including those arising from hazing and campus abuse.

We bring unique qualifications to the fight against hazing:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, previously worked as an insurance defense attorney at a national firm (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/). This experience is invaluable in hazing cases, as she understands exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies value—and often undervalue—claims. She knows their delay tactics, coverage exclusion arguments, and settlement strategies, helping us anticipate their moves and secure justice for our clients. We know their playbook because we used to run it.

• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Ralph Manginello, our managing partner (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/), has a proven track record taking on formidable defendants. Our firm was one of the few Texas firms involved in the complex BP Texas City explosion litigation, demonstrating our capacity to fight billion-dollar corporations and their legal teams. With federal court experience in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, we are not intimidated by national fraternities, multi-campus university systems, or their well-resourced defense. 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 recovering significant results for families in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. We collaborate with economists to accurately value lost earning potential and work with medical and life care planners to project lifelong care costs for victims of permanent injuries like traumatic brain injuries or organ damage. We don’t settle cheap. We build cases that force accountability.

• Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) underscores our deep understanding of how criminal hazing charges intersect with civil litigation. This dual perspective allows us to advise clients on both criminal exposure and civil liability, offering a comprehensive legal strategy.

• Forensic and Investigative Depth: Hazing cases demand an aggressive and thorough investigation. We deploy a network of experts, including medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, and psychologists, to uncover and prove the hidden truth. We are adept at obtaining and analyzing crucial evidence, such as deleted group chats, internal chapter records, and university documents, through subpoenas and public records requests. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

From our Houston office, we serve Missouri families and those throughout Texas, understanding that when hazing occurs at Texas universities, its impact resonates far beyond campus borders. We know this is one of the hardest things a family can face, which is why our approach is rooted in empathy and unwavering victim advocacy. Our job is to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family.

Call to Action

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

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

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We’ll listen to your story without judgment.
• Review any evidence you have (photos, texts, medical records) and advise on further preservation.
• Explain your legal options: whether to pursue a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• Discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
• Answer your questions about costs. We work on a contingency fee basis, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case (watch our video explaining contingency fees: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc).
• You will feel no pressure to hire us on the spot; take the time you need to decide.
• Everything you tell us is strictly confidential.

Whether you’re in Chesterfield, St. Louis, or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone. Call us today.

Contact Attorney911 for a Free, Confidential Review of Your Hazing Case:

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

Hablamos Español. Contact Lupe Peña by email 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

Safe Alternatives to Greek Life in Missouri

For students in Missouri seeking meaningful campus connections without hazing risks:

Campus Organizations (Hazing-Free Alternatives)

• Student Government: Leadership without pledging
• Academic Honor Societies: Phi Beta Kappa, Golden Key, discipline-specific (legitimate honor societies do NOT haze)
• Career-Focused Groups: Pre-Law Society, Business Club, Engineering organizations
• Community Service: Circle K, Habitat for Humanity campus chapters
• Religious/Spiritual Groups: Campus ministry, interfaith organizations
• Cultural Organizations: Cultural centers, international student associations
• Club Sports & Intramural Athletics: Team camaraderie without hazing culture

Social Alternatives

• Residence hall communities and programming
• Academic study groups and tutoring programs
• Part-time campus employment
• Research assistant positions
• Volunteer opportunities (local food banks, tutoring programs)
• Campus recreation programs

What to Look for in ANY Organization

Before joining any group, students should verify:

• ☑️ Clear written anti-hazing policy
• ☑️ Faculty or staff advisor actively involved
• ☑️ Transparent membership process with no “secret” phases
• ☑️ No “pledging” period with undisclosed activities
• ☑️ Open meetings you can observe before committing
• ☑️ Current members willing to discuss experiences honestly

Red Flags to Avoid

• 🚩 “What happens here stays here” culture
• 🚩 Excessive time demands that affect academics
• 🚩 Required alcohol consumption at events
• 🚩 “New member education” with vague descriptions
• 🚩 Sleep deprivation expectations
• 🚩 Financial demands beyond standard dues

COMPLETE MISSOURI UNIVERSITY DIRECTORY

Attorney911 tracks every higher education institution in Missouri. For reference:

• A T Still University of Health Sciences | Kirksville, Adair County | Private Non-Profit
• Aquinas Institute of Theology | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Private Non-Profit
• Avila University | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private Non-Profit
• Baptist Bible College | Springfield, Greene County | Private Non-Profit
• Barnes-Jewish College Goldfarb School of Nursing | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Private Non-Profit
• Baylor University | Waco, McLennan County | Private Non-Profit
• Bolivar Technical College | Bolivar, Polk County | Private Non-Profit
• Bryan University | Springfield, Greene County | Private For-Profit
• Calvary University | Kansas City, Cass County | Private Non-Profit
• Central Christian College of the Bible | Moberly, Randolph County | Private Non-Profit
• Central Methodist University-College of Graduate and Extended Studies | Fayette, Howard County | Private Non-Profit
• Central Methodist University-College of Liberal Arts and Sciences | Fayette, Howard County | Private Non-Profit
• Chamberlain University-Missouri | St. Louis, St. Louis County | Private For-Profit
• City Vision University | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private Non-Profit
• College of the Ozarks | Point Lookout, Taney County | Private Non-Profit
• Columbia College | Columbia, Boone County | Private Non-Profit
• Conception Seminary College | Conception, Nodaway County | Private Non-Profit
• Concorde Career College-Kansas City | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private For-Profit
• Cottey College | Nevada, Vernon County | Private Non-Profit
• Covenant Theological Seminary | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Cox College | Springfield, Greene County | Private Non-Profit
• Drury University | Springfield, Greene County | Private Non-Profit
• Drury University-College of Continuing Professional Studies | Springfield, Greene County | Private Non-Profit
• Eden Theological Seminary | Webster Groves, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Evangel University | Springfield, Greene County | Private Non-Profit
• Evangel University-College of Online Learning | Springfield, Greene County | Private Non-Profit
• Fontbonne University | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Harris-Stowe State University | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Public University
• Hannibal-LaGrange University | Hannibal, Marion County | Private Non-Profit
• Kansas City Art Institute | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private Non-Profit
• Kansas City University | Joplin, Jasper County | Private Non-Profit
• Kansas City University | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private Non-Profit
• Kenrick Glennon Seminary | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Lindenwood University | Saint Charles, St. Charles County | Private Non-Profit
• Lincoln University | Jefferson City, Cole County | Public University
• Logan University | Chesterfield, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Maryville University of Saint Louis | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary | Kansas City, Clay County | Private Non-Profit
• Missouri Baptist University | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Missouri Southern State University | Joplin, Jasper County | Public University
• Missouri University of Science and Technology | Rolla, Phelps County | Public University
• Missouri Valley College | Marshall, Saline County | Private Non-Profit
• Missouri Western State University | Saint Joseph, Buchanan County | Public University
• Nazarene Theological Seminary | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private Non-Profit
• Northwest Missouri State University | Maryville, Nodaway County | Public University
• Ozark Christian College | Joplin, Jasper County | Private Non-Profit
• Ozarks Technical Community College | Springfield, Greene County | Public University
• Park University | Parkville, Platte County | Private Non-Profit
• Ponce Health Sciences University-St Louis | St. Louis, St. Louis City | Private For-Profit
• Ranken Technical College | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Private Non-Profit
• Research College of Nursing | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private For-Profit
• Rockhurst University | Kansas City, Jackson County | Private Non-Profit
• Saint Louis Christian College | Florissant, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Saint Louis College of Health Careers-Fenton | Fenton, St. Louis County | Private For-Profit
• Saint Louis University | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Private Non-Profit
• Southeast Missouri Hospital College of Nursing and Health Sciences | Cape Girardeau, Cape Girardeau County | Private Non-Profit
• Southeast Missouri State University | Cape Girardeau, Cape Girardeau County | Public University
• Southern Baptist University | Bolivar, Polk County | Private Non-Profit
• Stephens College | Columbia, Boone County | Private Non-Profit
• Stevens-The Institute of Business & Arts | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Private For-Profit
• The Continents States University | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Private Non-Profit
• Truman State University | Kirksville, Adair County | Public University
• University of Central Missouri | Warrensburg, Johnson County | Public University
• University of Health Sciences and Pharmacy in St. Louis | Saint Louis, St. Louis City | Private Non-Profit
• University of Missouri-Columbia | Columbia, Boone County | Public University
• University of Missouri-Kansas City | Kansas City, Jackson County | Public University
• University of Missouri-St Louis | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Public University
• University of Missouri-System Office | Columbia, Boone County | Public University
• Urshan College | Wentzville, St. Charles County | Private Non-Profit
• Urshan Graduate School of Theology | Wentzville, St. Charles County | Private Non-Profit
• Washington University in St Louis | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Webster University | Saint Louis, St. Louis County | Private Non-Profit
• Westminster College | Fulton, Callaway County | Private Non-Profit
• William Jewell College | Liberty, Clay County | Private Non-Profit
• William Woods University | Fulton, Callaway County | Private Non-Profit

COMPLETE MISSOURI GREEK ORGANIZATION DIRECTORY

Attorney911 tracks every IRS-registered fraternity and sorority in Missouri. Complete directory:

• CENTRAL COAST ALPHA GAMMA RHO ALUMNI ASSOCIATION | EIN: 23-7321954 | BALLWIN, MO
• ETA OMICRON CHAPTER OF ALPHA TAU OMEGA INC | EIN: 23-7121705 | CANTON, MO
• ALPHA PHI HOUSE CORP-WASHINGTON UNI | EIN: 43-1306751 | CHESTERFIELD, MO
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 30-1361586 | CHESTERFIELD, MO
• MISSOURI MU ALUMNI VOLUNTEER CORPORATION | EIN: 43-1771178 | CHESTERFIELD, MO
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 83-2767950 | COLUMBIA, MO
• CENTRAL MISSOURI SIGMA CHI ALUMNI | EIN: 71-0958302 | COLUMBIA, MO
• SIGMA NU FRATERNITY | EIN: 23-7432859 | COLUMBIA, MO
• SIGMA PHI EPSILON FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 85-2032822 | COLUMBIA, MO
• ALPHA EPSILON DELTA | EIN: 83-0505441 | CPE GIRARDEAU, MO
• MISSOURI ZETA CHAPTER OF THE SIGMA PHI EPSILON FRATERNITY | EIN: 43-6052841 | CPE GIRARDEAU, MO
• KAPPA BETA GAMMA INTERNATIONAL INC | EIN: 47-5556982 | FAYETTE, MO
• RHO CHAPTER CHI ETA PHI SORORITY INC | EIN: 73-1716185 | FLORISSANT, MO
• SIGMA ALPHA EPSILON FRATERNITY AT WESTMINSTER COLLEGE | EIN: 30-0623072 | JEFFERSON CTY, MO
• DELTA SIGMA | EIN: 87-3950365 | JOPLIN, MO
• ALPHA DELTA KAPPA | EIN: 16-6094122 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• ALPHA DELTA KAPPA SORORITY INC | EIN: 64-0695510 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• FLORIDA ALPHA NU CHAPTER | EIN: 59-6200536 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• FLORIDA EPSILON DELTA CHAPTER | EIN: 26-0100246 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• GAMMA RHO LAMBDA SORORITY | EIN: 20-0228075 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY | EIN: 23-7279495 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• NEW JERSEY GAMMA CHAPTER | EIN: 22-6102549 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• PHI SIGMA KAPPA PROPERTIES INC | EIN: 61-1934336 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• TENNESSEE ALPHA PHI CHAPTER | EIN: 23-7120428 | KANSAS CITY, MO
• GAMMA EPSILON CHAPTER OF PHI SIGMA KAPPA | EIN: 43-1499250 | KIRKSVILLE, MO
• ZETA PHI BETA SORORITY INC | EIN: 20-8719564 | LEES SUMMIT, MO
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 47-4075292 | MARSHALL, MO
• 314 EDUCATION FOUNDATION | EIN: 92-3956790 | OVERLAND, MO
• PHI SIGMA RHO NATIONAL SORORITY | EIN: 43-1813125 | ROLLA, MO
• IOTA CLUB OF THETA XI | EIN: 23-7160343 | SAINT CHARLES, MO
• MISSOURI IOTA CHAPTER OF THE PHI DELTA THETA FRATERNITY | EIN: 46-5736793 | SAINT CHARLES, MO
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 81-1932340 | SAINT JOSEPH, MO
• ALPHA DELTA PHI INTERNATIONAL INC ELIOT CHAPTER | EIN: 81-4510394 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• ALPHA OMEGA EPISLON WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN SAINT LOUIS COLONY | EIN: 46-4539381 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• DELTA CHI FRATERNITY | EIN: 46-3387168 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• DELTA DELTA CORPORATION FOR PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT | EIN: 80-0402136 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• SIGMA GAMMA RHO SORORITY INC | EIN: 43-6073678 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• SIGMA LEGACY FOUNDATION | EIN: 46-2250210 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• SIGMA TAU GAMMA FRATERNITY | EIN: 23-7085178 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• TEMPLE CHARITY & ACTIVITY ASSN 1102 | EIN: 43-6046378 | SAINT LOUIS, MO
• ALPHA SIGMA ALPHA SORORITY | EIN: 43-6065568 | SPRINGFIELD, MO
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 82-4380549 | SPRINGFIELD, MO
• BETA OMEGA TKE CHAPTER INC | EIN: 82-2278081 | SPRINGFIELD, MO
• DELTA CHI FRATERNITY | EIN: 43-1381725 | SPRINGFIELD, MO
• FRATERNITY OF PHI GAMMA DELTA PSI MU CHAPTER | EIN: 20-8900247 | SPRINGFIELD, MO
• RHO SIGMA SIGMA | EIN: 83-2360230 | SPRINGFIELD, MO
• THETA TAU | EIN: 43-0765719 | SPRINGFIELD, MO
• THE BETA NU CHAPTER OF KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 43-6070090 | ST LOUIS, MO
• VIRGINIA ZETA CHAPTER OF PI BETA PHI HOUSE CORPORATION | EIN: 54-1192484 | TWN AND CNTRY, MO
• SIGMA CHAPTER OF THE FRATERNITY OF ALPHA KAPPA LAMBDA | EIN: 92-1205032 | WARRENSBURG, MO
• KAPPA ALPHA PSI | EIN: 23-7385521 | WARSON WOODS, MO