Armstrong County Fraternity Hazing Attorneys | Attorney911 — The Attorneys Who Shut Down Pi Kappa Phi | $24M+ National Pike Settlements | Federal Court | Former Insurance Defense | 1-888-ATTY-911

In Armstrong County, we cherish our wide-open Texas skies, the close-knit communities that define our towns like Claude and Goodnight, and the strong values we instill in our children. We raise our sons and daughters with a sense of pride and determination, often with the hope they’ll go on to higher education, whether it’s at a local institution or one of Texas’s esteemed universities. We send them off envisioning bright futures, academic achievement, and healthy social connections.

However, sometimes the reality on college campuses can betray these hopes. Imagine receiving a harrowing call late at night – your child, who left Armstrong County full of dreams, is in the emergency room, severely injured after an “initiation ritual” gone wrong. Perhaps they were found unconscious, forced to drink beyond their limits, or sustained injuries from a degrading physical challenge. The fear, confusion, and anger would be overwhelming. The incident might have occurred at an off-campus house near Amarillo or Lubbock, a few hours drive from your Armstrong County home, or perhaps it happened on the campus of a major Texas university, miles away. The details might be vague, shrouded in secrecy, with other students reluctant to speak out, all whispering about “what happens here stays here.”

This terrifying scenario is not a distant possibility; it’s a harsh reality that parents across Texas, including those in Armstrong County, face every year. It’s a reality we at The Manginello Law Firm have seen firsthand, most recently in the $10 million lawsuit we filed on behalf of Leonel Bermudez against the University of Houston and Pi Kappa Phi fraternity in late 2025. Leonel’s story, which unfolded in Houston, underscores the severe dangers and lasting trauma of modern hazing.

If your child is caught in such a nightmare, whether in Armstrong County or at any Texas institution, you need immediate, decisive action and experienced legal guidance. This comprehensive guide is designed for families in Armstrong County and across Texas who are navigating the complex and often secretive world of college hazing. We will explain:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, far beyond outdated stereotypes.
• The specific laws in Texas and at the federal level designed to combat hazing.
• How national hazing tragedies inform our understanding of local incidents, including those at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University.
• The legal options available to victims and their families in Armstrong County and throughout Texas.

This article provides general information and is not a substitute for personalized legal advice. Hazing cases are highly sensitive and complex. While we strive to educate, only a confidential consultation with an experienced attorney can offer guidance tailored to your unique situation. The Manginello Law Firm is here to serve families throughout Texas, including our neighbors in Armstrong County, providing legal emergency services when you need them most.

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

For families in Armstrong County, the image of hazing might still be rooted in old movies or exaggerated tales. However, modern hazing is far more insidious, dangerous, and technologically sophisticated than ever before. It’s not just a rite of passage; it’s abuse that endangers young lives and often goes tragically wrong.

Hazing is defined in plain English as any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, keeping membership, or gaining status in a group, where the behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits. This definition is crucial because it highlights that “I agreed to it” does not automatically make it safe or legal when there is peer pressure and a stark power imbalance.

Main Categories of Hazing

Hazing manifests in various forms, often escalating over time and blending traditional abuses with new, digitally enabled tactics.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains one of the most common and deadly forms of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking of alcohol, often to blackout levels. This includes chugging challenges, “lineups” where new members must consume large quantities of alcohol quickly, drinking games designed for rapid intoxication, or being pressured to consume unknown or mixed substances. The goal is often to incapacitate and humiliate, but the tragic reality is severe alcohol poisoning, brain damage, and death.

• Physical Hazing: Beyond the stereotypical paddling, physical hazing today involves extreme calisthenics, brutal “workouts,” or “smokings” far beyond normal athletic conditioning. It includes sleep deprivation, food or water deprivation, and exposure to extreme cold/heat or dangerous environments. Victims may suffer broken bones, internal injuries, dehydration, rhabdomyolysis (a severe muscle breakdown that can cause kidney failure), and even heatstroke, as seen in the tragic death of Bruce Dean Goodrich at Texas A&M.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These acts are deeply degrading and psychologically damaging. They can involve forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (such as the “roasted pig” pose alleged in the Bermudez case at UH), wearing degrading costumes, or participating in acts with racial, sexist, or homophobic overtones. The intent is to strip new members of their dignity and enforce submission.

• Psychological Hazing: This form of hazing targets a new member’s mental and emotional well-being. It can include persistent verbal abuse, threats, forced social isolation, or constant manipulation. Public shaming, whether face-to-face or on social media, leaves lasting scars, instilling fear, anxiety, and deep-seated trauma. The psychological toll can be immense, leading to depression, anxiety, and even suicidal ideation.

• Digital/Online Hazing: This is a rapidly evolving area. New members are often forced into highly controlled group chats on platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, or Discord, where they are subject to constant demands, late-night call-outs, and digital surveillance. This can involve daring members to perform embarrassing or dangerous acts, posting humiliating content on social media (Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok), or using location-sharing apps like “Find My Friends” to track their movements. Pledges might be pressured to create or share compromising images or videos of themselves or others. This digital dimension can make escape feel impossible, as the harassment follows them everywhere.

In all its forms, modern hazing is predicated on a power imbalance, secrecy, and the exploitation of a new member’s desire to belong. For families in Armstrong County whose children are preparing for college or already attending, understanding these types of hazing is the first step in prevention and protection.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception that hazing only occurs in fraternities. While Greek life is often in the spotlight, hazing is a pervasive issue found across a wide array of college organizations:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes traditional Interfraternity Council (IFC) and Panhellenic Council (PHC) organizations, as well as National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) and multicultural Greek organizations. Despite strict national anti-hazing policies, local chapters often operate underground.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: At institutions like Texas A&M, the Corps of Cadets has a history of hazing allegations, often disguised as “training” or “tradition,” mimicking military-style abuses.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to baseball, soccer, and cheerleading squads, hazing in collegiate athletics is a significant problem. The intense pressure to bond and prove loyalty can lead to dangerous rituals.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups like marching bands, orchestras, and theater troupes have been implicated in hazing, where members endure physical endurance tests, sleep deprivation, or public humiliation as part of “team building.”
• Spirit Squads and Tradition Clubs: Groups like the Texas Cowboys at UT Austin or other campus spirit organizations, often deeply intertwined with university traditions, can engage in similar patterns of abuse.
• Some Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: Hazing can even seep into groups dedicated to community service, cultural celebration, or academic pursuits, where the desire for exclusivity and perceived “tradition” overrides safety.

The common thread across these diverse groups is that hazing thrives on social status, unquestioning loyalty, and secrecy. These elements create an environment where dangerous practices are perpetuated, often with the implicit understanding that to expose them means ostracization or “getting the group in trouble.” This culture of silence makes it incredibly difficult for victims to come forward without fear of retaliation, but it’s crucial for families in Armstrong County to understand that these behaviors are illegal, unsafe, and unacceptable regardless of the type of organization involved.

LAW & LIABILITY FRAMEWORK (TEXAS + FEDERAL)

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas is crucial for any family affected by this abuse, whether you are in Armstrong County or elsewhere in the state. Texas has specific laws designed to combat hazing, and federal regulations also play a significant role. These laws provide avenues for both criminal prosecution and civil litigation, aiming to punish perpetrators and compensate victims.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has clear statutory language regarding hazing, primarily found in the Texas Education Code. This isn’t just a university policy; it’s state law.

Hazing is defined as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed by one person or with others, whether on or off campus, 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 means that if someone makes you do something dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they meant to do it or were reckless about the risk, that’s hazing under Texas law.

Key aspects of the Texas hazing statute:

• Location is irrelevant: Hazing can happen on or off campus. An incident at a private residence in Claude, a ranch in Goodnight, or an off-campus fraternity house in Lubbock or Austin is still subject to these laws.
• Types of harm: It covers both mental or physical harm, acknowledging the severe psychological toll hazing can take.
• Intent: The perpetrator doesn’t need to have specific malicious intent. Being reckless – meaning they knew or should have known the risk and acted anyway – is sufficient.
• “Consent” is not a defense: A critical aspect of Texas law is that even if the victim “agreed” or “consented,” it is still legally considered hazing if it meets the definition. The law recognizes that consent given under duress, peer pressure, or fear of exclusion is not true, free consent.

Criminal Penalties:
Individuals and organizations can face criminal charges under Texas hazing laws:

• Class B Misdemeanor: This is the default classification for hazing, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury and requires medical attention, the charge escalates.
• State Jail Felony: If hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it becomes a state jail felony, carrying more severe penalties.
• Failing to Report: If a member or officer of an organization knows about hazing and fails to report it, they can also face misdemeanor charges.
• Retaliation: Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor.

These criminal penalties highlight the seriousness with which Texas law views hazing.

Organizational Liability:
Beyond individuals, organizations themselves can be held criminally responsible for hazing if:

• The organization authorized or encouraged the hazing activity; OR
• An officer or member, acting in an official capacity, knew about the hazing and failed to report it.

Organizations facing criminal charges can be subject to fines of up to $10,000 per violation. Furthermore, universities have the power to revoke an organization’s recognition and ban it from campus, leading to a loss of privileges and often a decline in membership. This dual criminal accountability for both individuals and organizations is a key aspect of Texas hazing law.

Criminal vs Civil Cases

It’s important for families in Armstrong County to understand the distinct, but often intertwined, paths of criminal and civil cases:

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated and pursued by the state (prosecutors) against individuals or organizations accused of violating hazing laws. The primary goal of a criminal case is to punish the guilty party through penalties like jail time, fines, or probation. In hazing context, criminal charges can range from misdemeanor hazing offenses to assault, furnishing alcohol to minors, or even manslaughter or negligent homicide in cases involving serious injury or death.

• Civil Cases: These are initiated by the victims of hazing, or by their surviving family members in cases of wrongful death, against those responsible for the harm. The main objective of a civil lawsuit is to obtain monetary compensation for the victim’s damages (medical bills, lost income, pain and suffering) and to hold the accountable parties financially responsible. Civil cases often focus on legal theories such as:

  • Negligence and Gross Negligence: Arguing that the responsible parties (individuals, local chapter, national organization, university) failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent hazing, or acted with conscious indifference to the safety of others.
  • Wrongful Death: Brought by families after a hazing-related fatality.
  • Negligent Supervision: Alleging that institutions or organizations failed to properly oversee their members or campus activities.
  • Premises Liability: If the hazing occurred on property owned or controlled by responsible parties who failed to maintain a safe environment.
  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress: For severe psychological harm.
  • Assault and Battery: For physical harm.

It is critical to note that a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. The burden of proof is lower in civil court, and families can pursue compensation even if criminal charges are not filed or do not result in a conviction. Often, criminal and civil cases proceed simultaneously, each serving different purposes in achieving justice.

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

Beyond state law, federal regulations also impact how hazing is addressed on college campuses:

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This crucial piece of legislation, passed in response to increasing hazing deaths nationwide, requires colleges and universities that receive federal funding to meet new transparency and prevention standards. By roughly 2026, these institutions must:

  • Publicly report hazing incidents and disciplinary actions in a clear and accessible manner.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention programs, particularly for new students and student leaders.
  • Maintain and submit comprehensive data on hazing violations.
    This Act provides a federal lever for accountability and improved hazing prevention, directly impacting institutions like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor.

• Title IX: This federal 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 mandated to investigate, take steps to end the harassment, prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effects. This can provide a powerful avenue for accountability, particularly in hazing incidents involving sexual misconduct.

• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. While not exclusively a hazing law, hazing incidents often overlap with Clery reporting requirements, especially if they involve assault, sexual offenses, or alcohol/drug-related crimes. This ensures that institutions maintain public safety statistics and issue timely warnings about certain threats, including those arising from hazing.

These federal laws create additional layers of accountability and expectations for universities to address hazing comprehensively, affecting how they investigate incidents and support victims.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Determining who is legally responsible in a hazing case can be complex, but an experienced legal team will carefully identify all potential defendants. This is vital for maximizing a victim’s chances of receiving full and fair compensation.

• Individual Students: These are often the most direct perpetrators. They include students who actively planned, encouraged, supplied alcohol, performed the hazing acts, or participated in cover-ups. Even those who stood by and did nothing to help may face civil liability.

• Local Chapter/Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team unit often bears direct responsibility. While often composed of student members, the chapter itself (if it’s a recognized legal entity) can be sued. Key individuals here include the chapter officers (presidents, pledge masters, risk managers) who may have approved, condoned, or negligently allowed the hazing to occur.

• National Fraternity/Sorority: Most Greek organizations on Texas campuses are part of larger national (or international) bodies. These national organizations set policies, provide training, collect dues, and often have disciplinary authority over local chapters. They can be held liable if they:

  • Knew or should have known about a pattern of hazing within their chapters, especially the local one.
  • Failed to adequately train local members on anti-hazing policies.
  • Failed to enforce their own rules, essentially turning a blind eye to violations.
  • Had prior warnings or documented reports of similar hazing that they ignored.

• University or Governing Board: Colleges and universities in Texas, whether public (like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin) or private (like SMU, Baylor), can be sued under various theories:

  • Negligence: Failing to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable harm, especially if they had prior knowledge of hazing within a group.
  • Deliberate Indifference: In cases involving severe misconduct like sexual harassment (under Title IX), if the university knew about the hazing and failed to take appropriate action.
  • Breach of Contract: If the university failed to uphold its own stated policies regarding student safety or anti-hazing, and that failure led to harm.
    Public universities benefit from some sovereign immunity under Texas law, meaning they cannot be sued without their consent or an express waiver of immunity. However, exceptions exist, particularly for gross negligence or when suing individual employees in their personal capacity. Furthermore, Title IX violations can effectively waive sovereign immunity.

• Third Parties: Depending on the specific circumstances, other entities might also be liable:

  • Landlords/Property Owners: If a hazing incident occurs at an off-campus house where the owner knew or should have known about dangerous activities, they might be held responsible.
  • Alcohol Providers: Bars, stores, or individuals who illegally provide alcohol to minors that contributes to a hazing incident can face liability under “dram shop” laws.
  • Vendors or Security Companies: If they were hired for an event where hazing occurred and failed in their duty of care.

Every hazing case is fact-specific, and not every party is liable in every situation. An experienced hazing litigation attorney will conduct a thorough investigation to identify all potentially liable parties and hold them accountable.

NATIONAL HAZING CASE PATTERNS (ANCHOR STORIES)

While specific hazing tragedies may be geographically distant from Armstrong County, their legal and social impact resonates across every college campus in Texas. These national anchor cases reveal critical patterns of hazing, expose the institutional failures that allow it to persist, and demonstrate the immense human and financial costs involved. For families in Armstrong County whose children attend Texas universities, these precedents are vital in understanding culpability and the pathways to justice.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Forced or excessive alcohol consumption remains the single deadliest form of hazing, a tragic reality underscored by numerous cases.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (February 2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries and a ruptured spleen after a brutal “bid acceptance” night. He was forced to consume a dangerous amount of alcohol, falling repeatedly while visibly incapacitated. Fraternity members delayed calling 911 for nearly 12 hours, fearing they would get the chapter in trouble. The chapter’s own security cameras captured the horrific events. This case resulted in dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, substantial civil litigation culminating in confidential settlements, and the enactment of Pennsylvania’s Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law, one of the toughest in the nation. This tragedy highlighted the lethal combination of extreme intoxication, a callous delay in seeking medical help, and a pervasive culture of silence and cover-up.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (November 2017): Andrew Coffey, an FSU pledge, tragically died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them rapidly. His death prompted a temporary suspension of all Greek life at FSU and a sweeping overhaul of university policies. Criminal charges were filed against multiple members, with most pleading guilty to misdemeanor hazing. The Coffey family filed a wrongful death lawsuit, reaching a confidential settlement. This case underscored how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster where young lives are needlessly lost.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (September 2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old LSU pledge, died after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game. Pledges were forced to drink heavily whenever they answered questions incorrectly. His blood-alcohol content was found to be an astounding 0.495% (nearly six times the legal limit for driving), leading to severe alcohol toxicity. The aftermath of Max’s death saw multiple members facing criminal charges, with one ultimately convicted of negligent homicide. This tragedy spurred Louisiana to enact the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute, demonstrating how public outrage over clear hazing leads to legislative change. The Gruver family reached confidential settlements with the national fraternity and others, and secured a $6.1 million verdict against an individual and insurer.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (March 2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire bottle of alcohol during a “Big/Little” night initiation. This devastating incident resulted in multiple criminal convictions for hazing-related offenses against fraternity members, with the chapter president personally ordered to pay $6.5 million to the Foltz family. Civically, the Foltz family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with $7 million coming from the Pi Kappa Alpha national organization and nearly $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This case emphasized that not only individuals and chapters, but also national organizations and even universities, face significant financial and reputational consequences for their role in hazing.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, hazing often involves brutal physical and ritualized abuse designed to “break down” new members, with equally devastating consequences.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (December 2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania. He was blindfolded, forced to wear a heavy backpack, and repeatedly tackled by members during a brutal “glass ceiling” ritual. Fraternity members delayed calling 911 for an hour, attempting to cover up the incident. Michael died from a traumatic brain injury. This became a landmark case, with multiple members convicted criminally, and, significantly, the national Pi Delta Psi fraternity itself convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter. The fraternity was banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years and fined over $110,000. This chilling case demonstrated that off-campus, remote “retreats” are often chosen precisely to conceal violent hazing, and that national organizations cannot escape culpability for such events.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing’s reach extends far beyond Greek life, infiltrating seemingly disciplined environments like collegiate athletics.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In a scandal that rocked the world of college sports, former Northwestern football players came forward with allegations of widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the prestigious football program spanning multiple years. The incidents included forced sexual acts, racial discrimination, and dehumanizing rituals. Multiple players filed lawsuits against Northwestern University and the coaching staff. Head coach Pat Fitzgerald was ultimately fired, leading to his own wrongful-termination suit against the university, which eventually settled confidentially. This high-profile case powerfully illustrated that hazing is not confined to Greek organizations but can fester in major university athletic programs, raising serious questions about institutional oversight and the responsibility of university leadership.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies share common threads: forced consumption of dangerous substances, humiliating and violent rituals, a pervasive atmosphere of secrecy, and, critically, delayed or denied medical care exacerbated by attempts at cover-up. For families in Armstrong County whose children attend, or plan to attend, a Texas university like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor, these cases offer crucial lessons. They demonstrate that:

• Hazing is a predictable risk across various student organizations.
• Institutions and national organizations often have a history of ignoring warning signs.
• Reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements, while providing some measure of justice, often come only after a tragedy has occurred and families pursue persistent litigation.

The legal landscape in Texas is shaped by these national precedents, and experienced legal counsel understands how to leverage these cases to advocate for Texas families. When tragedy strikes near Armstrong County or at any Texas campus, the lessons learned from these national cases are indispensable in the fight for accountability.

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

For families across Armstrong County, Texas, the decision of where to send your child for higher education is often guided by reputation, academic strength, and proximity. Many students from our communities look to prominent Texas institutions. While their academic offerings are exceptional, it is vital to acknowledge that no university, regardless of its reputation, is immune to the pervasive issue of hazing. Our firm has deep ties to these institutions, representing students and families across the state. The following sections provide an in-depth look at hazing and its context at five major Texas universities, with connections relevant to Armstrong County families.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston is a significant public research university located in the heart of Houston, a dynamic and diverse city that many Armstrong County families visit or have ties to. As the economic hub of Texas, Houston attracts students from across the state, including the Panhandle region. UH is a large, vibrant campus with a mix of commuter and residential students, fostering a lively campus culture and an active Greek life with numerous fraternities and sororities, alongside a myriad of other student organizations, cultural groups, and sports clubs.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH serves a diverse student body, boasting a significant Greek presence across Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council (PHC), National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural chapters. The university’s rapid growth and commitment to research have fostered a high-energy environment, which unfortunately also provides fertile ground for the power dynamics often associated with hazing within some student organizations.

5.1.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

The University of Houston maintains a strict policy prohibiting hazing. Their stance emphasizes that hazing is forbidden whether it occurs on-campus or off-campus. The policy specifically bans a wide range of activities, including the forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and any acts causing mental distress for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. UH provides clear reporting channels through the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). The university also posts its hazing policy and some disciplinary actions on its website, aiming for transparency.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

The University of Houston stands at the center of our firm’s most significant recent hazing case. In late 2025, Attorney911 filed a $10 million lawsuit on behalf of Leonel Bermudez against the University of Houston, the UH System Board of Regents, Pi Kappa Phi national headquarters, its housing corporation, and 13 individual fraternity members.

Leonel, a transfer student deeply committed to academics and seeking community, pledged the Beta Nu chapter of Pi Kappa Phi. The lawsuit alleges severe hazing, including:

• Being forced to carry a “pledge fanny pack” 24/7 containing degrading items like condoms, a sex toy, and nicotine devices, with threats of punishment for non-compliance.
• Subjection to hours-long “study/work” blocks, late-night driving duties, and forced physical exertion.
• Being sprayed with a hose “similar to waterboarding” and threatened with actual waterboarding.
• Forced consumption of milk, hot dogs, and peppercorns until vomiting, followed by immediate sprints.
• On November 3, 2025, Bermudez allegedly endured over 100 push-ups and 500 squats, leaving him unable to stand. He later passed brown urine, developed rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown), and acute kidney failure, requiring a four-day hospitalization. His creatine kinase (CK) levels were critically high.
• The lawsuit further details an incident where another pledge was allegedly hog-tied face-down with an object in his mouth for over an hour.

The university confirmed it suspended the Pi Kappa Phi chapter on November 6, 2025. The national organization also suspended the chapter, which ultimately voted to surrender its charter on November 14, 2025. This case highlights a disturbing pattern of physical and psychological abuse, and the university’s response indicates serious awareness of the allegations. Read more about the Bermudez case here:
• Click2Houston: https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2025/11/21/only-on-2-lawsuit-alleges-severe-hazing-at-university-of-houstons-pi-kappa-phi-chapter-fraternity/
• ABC13: https://abc13.com/post/waterboarding-forced-eating-physical-punishment-lawsuit-alleges-abuse-faced-injured-pledge-uhs-pi-kappa-phi-fraternity/18186418/
• Hoodline: https://hoodline.com/2025/11/university-of-houston-and-pi-kappa-phi-fraternity-face-10m-lawsuit-over-alleged-hazing-and-abuse/

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, understanding the jurisdiction is key. Since UH is in Houston, local law enforcement such as the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) or Houston Police Department (HPD) would investigate any criminal allegations. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in Harris County courts. Potential defendants in a civil suit could include individual students, the local Pi Kappa Phi chapter, the national Pi Kappa Phi organization, and the University of Houston and its Board of Regents. As a state-funded institution, the University of Houston retains some sovereign immunity under Texas law, but exceptions exist, particularly in cases of gross negligence, Title IX violations, or when claims involve individual university employees. Attorney911’s deep experience with Harris County courts and complex litigation allows us to expertly navigate these challenges.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

• Report Immediately: Utilize UH’s reporting channels through the Dean of Students office or UHPD for any suspected hazing.
• Document Thoroughly: Due to the severe nature of incidents like the Bermudez case, detailed documentation (screenshots of communications, photos of injuries, medical records) is crucial. Learn more about effective documentation at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs.
• Seek Legal Counsel: If hazing results in significant harm, contact an attorney with extensive experience handling Houston-based hazing cases, particularly those involving institutional defendants.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, located in College Station, is a cornerstone institution for many families in Armstrong County. Known for its rich traditions, strong alumni network, and, of course, the Corps of Cadets, A&M draws students from across Texas, including the Panhandle. While geographically distant from Armstrong County, the spirit of Aggieland is deeply ingrained in the values often shared across our region.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M prides itself on its unique spirit, epitomized by its Corps of Cadets and a deeply ingrained culture of tradition. This environment, while fostering loyalty, has unfortunately also been a breeding ground for hazing, often cloaked in the guise of “tradition” or “military discipline.” A&M also has a robust Greek life presence, alongside countless other student organizations and sports teams, all of which can unfortunately become sites of hazing.

5.2.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

Texas A&M has an explicit anti-hazing policy that is well-documented and communicated to students and organizations. It strictly prohibits any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation, admission, affiliation, or continued membership. Reporting channels include the Office of Student Conduct, the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD), and specific reporting mechanisms for the Corps of Cadets. Like UT, A&M maintains statistics and information about hazing violations.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Despite strict policies, A&M has a documented history of hazing incidents:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon Lawsuit (around 2021): This civil suit alleged severe hazing where pledges were subjected to harsh chemicals, including industrial-strength cleaner, poured on them along with raw eggs and spit. This resulted in severe chemical burns requiring emergency skin graft surgeries. The fraternity was suspended by the university, and the lawsuit brought by the pledges highlighted the extreme and dangerous nature of such acts.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging degrading hazing within the Corps. The allegations included being forced into sexually suggestive positions, such as being bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million, and A&M stated it addressed the matter under its internal regulations.
• Texas A&M Bonfire Collapse (1999): While not traditional hazing, this tragic event, which killed 12 students and injured 27, raised profound questions about the dangers of student-led “traditions” and the university’s oversight of high-risk activities. Civil lawsuits against university officials resulted in settlements exceeding $6 million.
• Bruce Dean Goodrich (1984): A Corps of Cadets member died from heatstroke during strenuous exercise at 2:30 AM. Three cadets pleaded guilty to hazing, with one expelled for tampering with evidence. This early case underscored the dangers of physical hazing within the Corps.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, a hazing case at Texas A&M would involve investigations by the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) and potentially the College Station Police Department. Civil litigation would proceed in Brazos County courts. The university, as a state institution, enjoys some sovereign immunity, which complicates lawsuits against it directly. However, claims can still be brought against individual perpetrators, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially individual university employees in certain circumstances. Our expertise in navigating sovereign immunity and in litigating against large institutions is critical here.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

• Report to A&M Student Conduct: If you suspect hazing, engage with the Office of Student Conduct or UPD.
• Seek Medical Attention Immediately: For any injuries or unusual symptoms, ensure your child gets prompt medical care and explicitly state the context of hazing to medical staff.
• Contact a Texas Hazing Attorney: Given the complexities of suing a public university in Texas, families from Armstrong County should immediately contact a lawyer familiar with Texas A&M’s unique culture and legal challenges.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is arguably the flagship public university in Texas, attracting thousands of students from Armstrong County and across the state due to its academic prowess and vibrant campus life. While distinct from A&M in many ways, UT Austin shares a prominent Greek life presence and a history of confronting hazing.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin is a large urban campus known for its blend of academic rigor, spirited traditions, and a dynamic student body. Greek life thrives here, encompassing a wide range of fraternities and sororities with rich social calendars. This campus environment, while offering immense opportunities, also presents challenges in ensuring student safety from hazing.

5.3.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

UT Austin maintains an unequivocal stance against hazing, emphasizing its illegality and inconsistency with university values. Their policy explicitly prohibits any form of hazing, whether physical, emotional, or psychological, and provides clear definitions aligned with Texas law. Critically, UT Austin maintains a public-facing Hazing Violations webpage that lists organizations, the nature of their violations, and the sanctions imposed. This is a significant tool for transparency, allowing families from Armstrong County to research specific organizations. Reporting is facilitated through the Dean of Students, Student Conduct and Academic Integrity, and the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD).

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public database of hazing violations provides valuable insight into the ongoing struggle against these practices:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): Documented violations included new members being directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics. The organization was found responsible for hazing and placed on probation, required to implement revised hazing-prevention education.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (January 2024): This chapter faced a lawsuit from an Australian exchange student who alleged severe assault during a party, resulting in a dislocated leg, broken ligaments, fractured tibia, and broken nose. The chapter was already suspended for prior hazing/safety violations, highlighting repeat offenses.
• Texas Cowboys (2018): This highly visible spirit organization faced sanctions after the death of a “New Man,” John “Jake” Stevens IV, in an alcohol-related incident during a designated “family time” for the new members. Subsequent investigations revealed hazing violations, leading to a long-term suspension for the group. This incident echoed a similar tragedy in 1995 involving the same organization and alcohol-related activities near the Colorado River.
• Phi Kappa Sigma (1998): Member Jack L. Ivey Jr., 23, died after pledges engaged in a drinking game with him, resulting in a blood-alcohol level of 0.40. This tragic death demonstrated the extreme dangers of forced consumption.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, a hazing incident at UT Austin would involve investigations by UTPD and/or Austin Police Department (APD). Civil cases would typically be filed in Travis County courts. As another public institution, UT Austin benefits from sovereign immunity. However, the university’s detailed public records of prior hazing violations can be powerful evidence in a civil lawsuit, demonstrating a pattern of documented misconduct and previous opportunities for the university to intervene more effectively. Attorney911 understands how to utilize these public records to build a strong case.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

• Check the UT Hazing Violations Page: Before joining any organization, Armstrong County families should consult the university’s public hazing database.
• Be Wary of “Tradition”: Question any activity that is justified solely by “tradition,” especially if it involves secrecy, physical discomfort, or forced consumption.
• Contact a Lawyer Familiar with UT’s Policies: An attorney experienced with UT Austin’s specific policies and its history of hazing can provide invaluable guidance.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University is a private institution located in Dallas, a major metropolitan area that is a significant destination for many Armstrong County families. SMU is known for its beautiful campus, competitive academics, and a vibrant, prominent Greek life, which unfortunately has also brought it into the spotlight for hazing incidents.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU cultivates an environment that blends academic excellence with a rich social scene. Greek life is a central component of campus culture, with a high percentage of students participating in fraternities and sororities. The university’s private status and affluent student body can sometimes create a unique dynamic where hazing incidents are perhaps less publicly broadcast but no less severe.

5.4.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

SMU maintains explicit anti-hazing policies that prohibit any act endangering the mental or physical health of a student for the purpose of affiliation. As a private institution, its policies are often robust, and it provides various reporting channels, including the Office of Student Conduct, the SMU Police Department (SMU PD), and an online reporting form. SMU actively promotes anonymous reporting through platforms like Real Response, encouraging students to come forward without fear.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

SMU has faced its share of hazing allegations and disciplinary actions:

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): This fraternity faced severe disciplinary action after new members reportedly endured paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and significant sleep deprivation. The chapter was suspended by the university for several years, with restrictions on its ability to recruit members.
• Sigma Chi (2016): An incident involved reports of new members being forced to drink excessive amounts of alcohol and perform degrading tasks. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement comprehensive risk management and education programs.
• Delta Gamma Sorority (2020): While sororities are often perceived as less prone to severe physical hazing, cases at SMU have included psychological and social hazing accusations involving new members being subjected to humiliating scavenger hunts and social exclusion if they did not comply with demands.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, criminal investigations related to hazing at SMU would typically involve SMU PD or the Dallas Police Department. Civil lawsuits would generally be filed in Dallas County courts. As a private university, SMU does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it potentially easier to sue directly compared to public institutions. This difference significantly impacts legal strategy and the scope of a lawsuit. Our firm’s experience in Dallas courts allows us to effectively litigate against private institutions and their national organizations.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

• Utilize Anonymous Reporting: SMU’s anonymous reporting options are crucial for students who fear retaliation.
• Question “Blind Loyalty”: Armstrong County families should encourage their children to critically evaluate any demands for secrecy or “blind loyalty” that compromise safety or well-being.
• Understand Liabilities: Private institutions have different legal protections than public ones; a lawyer can explain how this impacts potential lawsuits.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, situated in Waco, holds a unique position as a private Baptist university, attracting students from across Texas, including Armstrong County. Its strong religious affiliation and commitment to faith-based education present a distinct institutional culture that has both strengths and challenges regarding student conduct and safety.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor’s campus culture is deeply influenced by its Christian mission, emphasizing community, service, and spiritual development. Greek life is present but may operate differently than at purely secular universities, often with additional oversight reflecting the university’s values. However, even with this oversight, the desire for group affiliation can unfortunately create environments where hazing still occurs.

5.5.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

Baylor University explicitly prohibits hazing, articulating in its policies that any such activity is contrary to its mission and is illegal under Texas law. Their anti-hazing policies are comprehensive, covering physical, emotional, and psychological abuse. Baylor encourages reporting through its Dean of Students office, the Baylor Police Department (BUPD), and an ethics point hotline.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history has been marked by significant challenges related to student safety and accountability, particularly following a major sexual assault scandal involving its football program and Title IX compliance. This larger context has placed increased scrutiny on all aspects of student conduct, including hazing:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): An internal investigation into the baseball program led to the suspension of 14 players. The precise nature of the hazing was not fully disclosed publicly, but it involved activities deemed unacceptable by university standards, resulting in staggered suspensions over the early season. This incident showed that even within a highly visible NCAA sport, hazing can occur.
• Phi Gamma Delta (2018): While not at Baylor, the death of Joseph Little at Texas A&M during hazing for Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI) resonates deeply as part of the broader Texas Greek life landscape. This national fraternity also has a presence at Baylor, and such incidents underscore the wider organizational risks.
• Previous Greek Life Suspensions: Historically, Baylor has had to suspend various fraternities and sororities for hazing-related violations, often involving alcohol misuse, inappropriate new member challenges, and social misconduct during initiation periods.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Armstrong County families, criminal investigations at Baylor would typically involve BUPD and/or Waco Police Department. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in McLennan County courts. As a private university, Baylor does not have the protection of sovereign immunity, meaning it faces direct liability for negligence in hazing cases. This distinction is crucial for civil litigation strategies. Given Baylor’s recent history of high-profile litigation related to institutional misconduct, there is heightened sensitivity and legal precedent for holding the university accountable.

5.4.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

• Be Aware of “Zero Tolerance”: While Baylor officially maintains a zero-tolerance stance, Armstrong County families should understand that hazing can still occur underground and must be vigilant.
• Leverage Prior Scrutiny: Baylor’s recent institutional challenges can create a stronger imperative for the university to respond transparently and address hazing allegations seriously.
• Consult Legal Experts on Private University Hazing: An attorney experienced with private university conduct and a track record of holding institutions accountable, even those with religious affiliations, is essential.

FRATERNITIES & SORORITIES: CAMPUS-SPECIFIC + NATIONAL HISTORIES

For families in Armstrong County, understanding the “name” of a fraternity or sorority is often just the tip of the iceberg. Each local chapter, whether at UH, A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, is part of a larger national or international organization. These national bodies have their own histories, policies, and, unfortunately, often a pattern of hazing incidents that can directly inform a legal case.

6.1 Why National Histories Matter

When a student from Armstrong County pledges a fraternity or sorority in Texas, they are joining a local chapter, but they are also affiliating with a national organization. These national entities are powerful, well-funded, and ostensibly committed to member safety. They often:

• Maintain extensive policy manuals and risk management guidelines, explicitly prohibiting hazing. These policies exist precisely because the national organizations have, in the past, faced lawsuits, negative publicity, and severe penalties due to hazing.
• Have a history of prior incidents across their many chapters nationwide. This history is critical for establishing foreseeability. If a particular national fraternity has had multiple cases of alcohol-related hazing deaths at various campuses, and a Texas chapter of that same fraternity has an alcohol-related incident, the national organization cannot credibly claim ignorance. They had or should have had knowledge of the danger.

When a local chapter at a Texas university replicates hazing behaviors that have injured or killed students in other states or at other chapters, it demonstrates a repeating script. This pattern can strongly support claims of negligence or even gross negligence against the national entity, and can be pivotal in arguments for punitive damages against them.

6.2 Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

Many of the fraternities and sororities present at Texas’s major universities have national profiles tied to hazing incidents. Here, we outline some prominent examples and their national hazards, not to defame any specific local chapter, but to educate on patterns.

• Pi Kappa Phi: The national Pi Kappa Phi fraternity has faced significant hazing litigation, including the $10 million lawsuit filed by Attorney911 for Leonel Bermudez against the Beta Nu chapter at the University of Houston in late 2025. Nationally, Pi Kappa Phi was also involved in the tragic Andrew Coffey death at Florida State University in 2017, where a pledge died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night.” These cases demonstrate a pattern of dangerous alcohol-related hazing and extreme physical and psychological abuse, leading to severe injuries and deaths.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): Often cited as one of the fraternities with the highest number of hazing deaths nationally, SAE has a grim history. Prior to 2014, SAE ended its traditional pledge process due to repeated tragedies. Despite this, incidents persist. Lawsuits include a traumatic brain injury case at the University of Alabama (filed 2023) and a $1 million lawsuit at Texas A&M (around 2021) where pledges alleged severe chemical burns from industrial-strength cleaner poured on them during hazing. More recently, in January 2024, a lawsuit was filed against a UT Austin SAE chapter for an alleged assault on an exchange student, highlighting ongoing concerns even after national reforms.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike): The national Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity gained national notoriety with the Stone Foltz death at Bowling Green State University in 2021, resulting in a $10 million settlement for the family. In this incident, a pledge was forced to consume an entire bottle of alcohol. Another case involved David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University (2012), who died from alcohol poisoning, leading to a $14 million settlement. Pike chapters have been involved in previous alcohol-related incidents at Texas universities as well, including at UT Austin, demonstrating a consistent national pattern of dangerous alcohol consumption during “Big/Little” or “pledge” events.

• Phi Delta Theta: This fraternity is linked to the Max Gruver death at Louisiana State University (2017) where a pledge died from extreme alcohol toxicity during a “Bible study” drinking game. This incident led to the passage of the Max Gruver Act (making felony hazing a crime in Louisiana) and a $6.1 million verdict against an individual member’s insurer, in addition to other confidential settlements. Phi Delta Theta chapters have been present at UT Austin and Texas A&M.

• Kappa Alpha Order: This traditional Southern fraternity has faced numerous hazing accusations and suspensions across the country, often related to alcohol misuse, physical challenges, and perpetuating outdated “traditions.” At SMU in 2017, a Kappa Alpha chapter was suspended following reports of paddling, forced drinking, and sleep deprivation.

• Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI): This fraternity is linked to the tragic Danny Santulli case at the University of Missouri (2021), where a pledge suffered permanent brain damage (rendering him unable to walk, talk, or see) after excessive alcohol consumption. Santulli’s family settled with 22 defendants for multi-million dollar confidential sums. Joseph Little’s death during pledging activities at the Texas A&M chapter in 2018 also resulted in hazing findings against the chapter.

6.3 Tie Back to Legal Strategy

For Armstrong County families, these national and campus-specific patterns are not just historical footnotes; they are critical elements in a legal strategy.

• Foreseeability: The extensive national histories of these organizations demonstrate that they had clear knowledge of the dangers inherent in certain hazing practices. They cannot credibly claim an incident at a Texas chapter was “unforeseeable” if similar events have occurred repeatedly in their system.
• Failure to Act: This pattern evidence allows us to argue that national organizations failed in their duty to adequately train, supervise, and discipline their chapters, or that their anti-hazing policies were merely “paper policies” with no meaningful enforcement.
• Insurance Coverage: Documented national patterns can impact insurance coverage disputes. If insurers try to deny coverage by claiming a local incident was an “unforeseeable rogue act,” a history of similar incidents across the national organization can dismantle that defense.
• Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, establishing a pattern of knowing disregard for safety and repeated hazing can strengthen arguments for punitive damages, which are designed not just to compensate the victim but to punish the defendant and deter similar conduct in the future.

By meticulously researching and presenting these national and local histories, our legal team connects the dots from a specific incident in Texas to a broader pattern of organizational liability. This depth of understanding is crucial for litigation strategy, settlement leverage, and ultimately, for holding responsible parties accountable and compelling institutional change.

7. BUILDING A CASE: EVIDENCE, DAMAGES, STRATEGY

For families seeking justice after a hazing incident, building a compelling legal case requires meticulous evidence collection, a deep understanding of the damages incurred, and a strategic approach to litigation. At Attorney911, we approach each case with the investigative rigor necessary to stand up to powerful institutional defendants.

7.1 Evidence

In today’s interconnected world, evidence in hazing cases is increasingly digital, providing invaluable insights into what transpired. However, identifying and preserving all forms of evidence is paramount.

• Digital Communications: These are often the lifeblood of a hazing investigation. Group chat apps like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Signal, and Discord are frequently used to plan, coordinate, and comment on hazing activities. Conversations on Instagram DMs, Snapchat, and even fraternity-specific apps can be vital. Our team works with digital forensics experts to recover deleted messages and reconstruct timelines. Screenshots, properly taken with timestamps and participant names, are crucial.

• Photos & Videos: In the age of smartphones, hazing incidents are often captured on camera by participants themselves. This includes content filmed during events, sometimes for “entertainment,” shared in group chats, or posted on private social media accounts. Surveillance footage from security cameras at fraternity houses or off-campus venues can also provide key information. We understand the methods organizations use to try and erase this evidence, and we employ advanced techniques to recover it.

• Internal Organization Documents: These documents can reveal a chilling disconnect between stated policies and actual practice. They include pledge manuals (both official and “unofficial”), initiation scripts, lists of “traditions,” and emails or texts from officers discussing “what we’ll do to pledges.” Official national policies and training materials, when compared against the reality of a hazing incident, can demonstrate a failure to enforce rules.

• University Records: Colleges and universities maintain a wealth of records that can be instrumental. This includes prior conduct files, records of probation or suspensions against offending organizations, letters of warning, and incident reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices. Public records requests can compel the release of Clery reports and other disclosures, which often highlight patterns of prior incidents.

• Medical and Psychological Records: These document the full extent of the victim’s suffering. Emergency room and hospitalization records, surgery and rehabilitation notes, and toxicology reports are vital for physical injuries and substance abuse. For psychological trauma, psychological evaluations documenting PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidality are crucial in establishing non-economic damages.

• Witness Testimony: The accounts of individuals who observed or participated in the hazing are invaluable. This includes other pledges, current members, roommates, Resident Advisors (RAs), coaches, trainers, or even bystanders. Crucially, former members who left the organization or were expelled can often provide candid and powerful testimony, as their solidarity to the group may have waned.

7.2 Damages

When hazing results in injury or death, victims and their families can pursue various types of damages. These aim to compensate for the wide-ranging losses incurred, from quantifiable financial impacts to severe emotional and psychological suffering.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This category covers all costs associated with the victim’s physical recovery. It includes ambulance transport, emergency room visits, hospitalization (including ICU stays), surgeries, ongoing medical treatments, medications, and physical therapy. For catastrophic injuries such as brain damage or organ failure (like the acute kidney failure suffered by Leonel Bermudez), it can include long-term or even lifelong care, necessitating “life care plans” to cover future medical and assistance needs.

• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: Hazing can disrupt a student’s academic and career trajectory. Damages can cover lost wages if the victim or a parent had to miss work. It also includes reimbursement for tuition and fees for any semesters missed due to withdrawal or medical leave, the value of lost scholarships, and the financial impact of delayed graduation. In cases of permanent disability, economists can calculate the significant lifetime loss of earning capacity.

• Non-Economic Damages: These address the intangible but often devastating consequences of hazing:

  • Physical Pain and Suffering: The actual anguish endured from injuries, both immediate and ongoing.
  • Emotional Distress, Trauma, Humiliation: This covers the psychological toll, including diagnosed conditions like Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), severe depression, anxiety, and the profound humiliation suffered.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: The inability to participate in beloved activities, the withdrawal from social life, and the overall diminished quality of life resulting from the hazing.

• Wrongful Death Damages: In the most tragic cases, when hazing leads to death, surviving family members (parents, spouses, children) can seek damages for:

  • Funeral and Burial Costs: Direct expenses related to the passing.
  • Loss of Financial Support: Compensation for the income and household contributions the deceased would have made over their lifetime.
  • Loss of Companionship, Love, and Society: This is a significant component, recognizing the profound emotional void left by the deceased.
  • Grief and Emotional Suffering: The deep emotional distress experienced by surviving family members.
  • Mental Health Treatment: The costs of therapy and counseling for family members to cope with the traumatic loss.

• Punitive Damages: In Texas, punitive damages are not always awarded but can be significant when applied. Their purpose is to punish defendants for particularly reckless, willful, or malicious conduct and to deter similar actions in the future. These are typically sought when the defendant ignored prior warnings, engaged in particularly cruel or degrading hazing, attempted a cover-up, or showed callous indifference to known risks. Our firm’s experience in demonstrating gross negligence is key to pursuing these damages.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Hazing cases often involve multiple defendants, each with their own legal and financial resources. Understanding how these entities operate and how their insurance policies function is critical.

• Multi-Party Defense Teams: National fraternities, universities, and their various associated entities (like housing corporations) typically retain highly experienced defense lawyers supported by large legal teams. These lawyers are skilled at deflecting blame, minimizing damages, and trying to protect their clients’ reputations and assets.

• Insurance Coverage Disputes: A crucial aspect of hazing litigation involves navigating insurance. National fraternities, local chapters, and universities all carry various insurance policies (e.g., general liability, directors and officers liability) that may cover hazing-related claims. However, insurers often argue that hazing, or “intentional acts” like assault, are explicitly excluded from coverage. This can lead to complex legal battles over policy interpretation.

• Attorney911’s Advantage: This is where Attorney911’s unique expertise becomes invaluable. Lupe Peña, a former insurance defense attorney, knows the “playbook” of these insurance companies inside and out. She understands their delay tactics, their methods of undervaluing claims, and their strategies for invoking coverage exclusions. Combined with Ralph Manginello’s extensive experience litigating against powerful corporate defendants (as seen in the BP Texas City explosion litigation), our firm is uniquely positioned to:

  • Identify all potential insurance policies and coverage sources.
  • Challenge unjustified coverage denials.
  • Force insurers to defend and indemnify their clients.
  • Maximize the victim’s recovery by strategically targeting all responsible parties and their financial resources.

By meticulously gathering evidence, understanding the full scope of damages, and strategically navigating the complex web of defendants and insurance companies, Attorney911 is dedicated to building strong cases that ultimately hold accountable those who facilitate or allow hazing to cause harm.

8. PRACTICAL GUIDES & FAQS

Navigating the aftermath of a hazing incident can feel isolating and overwhelming for families in Armstrong County and across Texas. Knowing what steps to take, what pitfalls to avoid, and where to turn for help is vital. This section provides practical guidance for parents, students, and witnesses.

8.1 For Parents

For parents in Armstrong County, recognizing the subtle signs of hazing and knowing how to respond effectively are critical to protecting your child.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert to changes in your child’s physical and emotional state. Watch for unexplained injuries (bruises, burns, cuts) or repeated vague “accidents.” Notice if they exhibit sudden exhaustion, extreme sleep deprivation, or drastic changes in mood, becoming anxious, withdrawn, or irritable. A common red flag is constant, secretive phone use, often tied to demanding group chats, accompanied by a fear of missing “mandatory” events. They might become defensive when asked about their activities or express that they “can’t talk about it” due to new group rules. See our video on signs of hazing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWdADo3DHRI (this video is a PI intro, but can be generally framed for this section’s context)

• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not judgment. Emphasize that your primary concern is their safety and well-being. Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with your group? Are you feeling good about the experience?” or “Is there anything making you uncomfortable?” Reinforce that you will support them, no matter what, and that their safety is always the priority over any group affiliation.

• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize medical care immediately, even if your child downplays the injury. Document everything: take clear photos of injuries, screenshot any text messages, emails, or social media posts, and write down everything your child tells you, including names, dates, and locations. This documentation is crucial for any potential legal action.

• Dealing with the University: If you decide to engage with university administrators, document every interaction. Ask specific questions about their knowledge of prior incidents involving the same organization and what actions were taken. Be aware that the university’s primary goal may be to protect its own reputation, which might conflict with your child’s best interests.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child sustains significant physical or psychological harm due to hazing, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing the incident or attempting a cover-up, it is imperative to talk to a lawyer. An experienced hazing attorney can help you navigate university protocols, protect your child’s rights, and pursue accountability.

8.2 For Students / Pledges

For students in Texas, whether from Armstrong County or beyond, taking direct ownership of your safety is crucial. Hazing often relies on your silence and your perceived “consent.”

• Is this Hazing or Just Tradition?: Ask yourself: Am I being coerced or pressured? Does this activity endanger my mental or physical health? Is it humiliating or degrading? Would older members in the group enjoy doing this activity themselves? Am I being told to keep secrets from my parents or the university? If the answers suggest discomfort, danger, or secrecy, it is likely hazing, regardless of how it’s labeled. Texas law is clear: “consent” is not a defense to hazing.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: The intense desire to belong, fear of exclusion, and the power dynamic between new members and older members often makes “consent” impossible. You simply cannot consent to an illegal act. Understand that you are the victim in these scenarios, and the law protects you regardless of any “agreement” made under duress.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely: If you feel unsafe or wish to leave a pledging process, you have the absolute legal right to do so at any time. You should not be subjected to retribution. If you fear retaliation, notify a trusted adult, family member, or university official (like the Dean of Students) before you formally withdraw. Many schools, and Texas law, have policies to protect “good-faith reporters” who seek aid in an emergency, offering limited immunity even if you were involved in underage drinking.

• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: If you or a friend is in danger, call 911 immediately. Texas law and many university policies provide amnesty for students who call for help in a medical emergency, even if underage drinking or hazing was involved. Your priority should be saving a life, not avoiding perceived trouble.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you are a former member or a witness to hazing, your decision to come forward can be life-saving and pivotal in holding perpetrators accountable.

• Acknowledge Guilt and Fear: It’s common to feel guilt, fear of retaliation, or loyalty to the organization. However, allowing dangerous hazing to continue makes you complicit in the harm. Your testimony can prevent future tragedies and provide justice for victims.

• Your Testimony Can Prevent Harm: Consider the impact your silence has already had. Your knowledge of past or ongoing hazing can be critical evidence, potentially leading to the closure of dangerous chapters, criminal convictions, and significant civil judgments that force institutions to change.

• Seek Legal Counsel: If you have witnessed hazing, or even participated in it and now regret your actions, you may have your own legal concerns. A lawyer can advise you on your rights and obligations, how to provide information without exposing yourself to unnecessary risk, and can help you navigate the process of giving testimony or evidence. Your cooperation can be crucial for an investigation, and lawyers can often help arrange conditions for your cooperation that protect your interests.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

Protecting a hazing claim starts immediately after an incident. Unfortunately, many families, including those in Armstrong County, make common mistakes that can severely jeopardize their ability to seek justice. Avoid these critical errors:

1. Letting Your Child Delete Messages or “Clean Up” Evidence: Parents often, out of a desire to protect their child from further perceived “trouble,” encourage deleting incriminating messages or photos. This is a catastrophic mistake. It can look like an obstruction of justice, make a case nearly impossible to prove, and can even be a criminal act itself.

   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing content. Screenshot group chats, texts, DMs, and social media posts. Back up digital evidence to a secure cloud server or external drive.

2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly: Our natural instinct as parents is to confront those who’ve harmed our child. However, directly confronting an organization signals that a complaint is coming, prompting them to immediately lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defenses.

   • What to do instead: Document everything in private, then immediately call Attorney911. Let your legal team manage all communications.

3. Signing University “Release” or “Resolution” Forms: Universities will often pressure families to sign waivers or “internal resolution” agreements, often sweetened with promises of “healing” or “moving past this.” Signing these without legal review is a critical mistake. You may unknowingly waive your right to sue or accept a resolution far below the actual value of your case.

   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university, an organization, or an insurance company without an experienced attorney reviewing it first.

4. Posting Details on Social Media Before Talking to a Lawyer: While sharing your story might feel cathartic, posting publicly on social media can severely damage a legal case. Defense attorneys meticulously search social media for information that can be used against victims, including inconsistencies in your story, or statements that could waive legal privilege.

   • What to do instead: Document your experiences privately. Let your lawyer control any public messaging strategy.

5. Letting Your Child Go Back to “One Last Meeting”: Organizers often try to get a hazing victim to come back for a “face-to-face” discussion or “one last meeting.” This is often a tactic to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that could harm their legal position.

   • What to do instead: Once you’re considering legal action, all communication with the organization should go through your attorney.

6. Waiting “to See How the University Handles It”: Universities will often promise thorough internal investigations and appropriate discipline. While some are serious, waiting for “the university process” often wastes precious time. Evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, and the statute of limitations continues to run. The university’s process is designed to manage risk for the institution, not necessarily to maximize justice or compensation for your child.

   • What to do instead: Preserve all evidence NOW. Consult a lawyer immediately. The university’s internal process is not a substitute for real accountability through the legal system.

7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer: Insurance adjusters, whether for the organization or the university, may contact you shortly after an incident. They sound helpful, but their goal is to collect information that can minimize their payout. Any recorded statement or early settlement offer will likely be used against you.

   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and refer them to your attorney. State, “My attorney will contact you.”

By avoiding these critical mistakes, families can preserve the integrity of their case and ensure they have the strongest possible position to pursue justice.

8.5 Short FAQ

Answers regarding hazing are complex and depend on specific circumstances. For precise legal advice regarding your situation, please contact Attorney911.

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, UT) have some sovereign immunity protection under Texas law, meaning they cannot be sued without their consent or a specific waiver. However, exceptions exist, particularly in cases of gross negligence, willful misconduct, or when suing individual employees for their actions. Furthermore, if the hazing involves sex-based discrimination or harassment, federal Title IX laws may allow victims to sue, waiving sovereign immunity. Private universities (like SMU, Baylor) generally do not have sovereign immunity, making them more directly susceptible to lawsuits. Every case depends on its specific facts—contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  Yes, it can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default. However, it escalates to a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who are officers of an organization and fail to report hazing can also face charges. This means that engaging in or concealing severe hazing can lead to serious criminal records and penalties.

• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
  Yes, absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts and the law recognize that “agreement” under intense peer pressure, the explicit or implicit threat of exclusion, and extreme power imbalances (common in hazing) is not true voluntary consent. Victims of hazing are not considered “consenting adults” in these coercive environments.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  Generally, in Texas, the statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits is two years from the date of the injury or death. However, this period can sometimes be extended by the “discovery rule,” especially if the harm or its cause was not immediately apparent, or in cases of fraudulent concealment where the hazing was actively hidden. Time is critical in hazing cases because evidence disappears rapidly and witnesses’ memories fade. It is always best to contact a lawyer as soon as possible. Learn more about Texas statute of limitations in 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 incident does not necessarily eliminate liability. Many major hazing tragedies, including the Michael Deng case (Pi Delta Psi retreat) and incidents at “unofficial” fraternity houses, occurred off-campus. Universities and national organizations can still be held liable based on their sponsorship of the organization, their control (or lack thereof) over its activities, their prior knowledge of hazing, and the foreseeability of such events.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  We understand the desire for privacy. While criminal cases are often public, a significant number of civil hazing cases are resolved through confidential settlements before going to trial. Our legal team will work to protect your child’s privacy while still aggressively pursuing accountability. You can discuss options for maintaining confidentiality during your initial consultation.

8.6 Safe Alternatives to Greek Life in Armstrong County

For students from Armstrong County seeking meaningful campus connections without the risks of hazing:

Campus Organizations (Hazing-Free Alternatives)

• Student Government: Leadership without pledging, focusing on genuine community representation.
• Academic Honor Societies: Organizations like Phi Beta Kappa honor academic excellence and do NOT haze.
• Career-Focused Groups: Many universities offer pre-professional societies (e.g., Pre-Law Society, Business Club, Engineering organizations) that provide networking and mentorship.
• Community Service: Groups like Circle K or Habitat for Humanity campus chapters offer camaraderie through altruism.
• Religious/Spiritual Groups: Campus ministries and interfaith organizations provide inclusive communities often centered on shared values.
• Cultural Organizations: Asian Student Associations, Black Student Unions, Hispanic Student Organizations, and international student associations foster identity and cultural exchange.
• Club Sports & Intramural Athletics: These provide team camaraderie and physical activity without the win-at-all-costs culture that can lead to hazing in varsity sports.

Social Alternatives

• Residence hall communities: Many dorms offer robust social programming and a built-in community.
• Academic study groups and tutoring programs: Connect with peers around shared academic goals.
• Part-time campus employment: Work alongside other students, building connections in a professional setting.
• Research assistant positions: Engage in meaningful work with faculty and build a network of like-minded individuals.
• Volunteer opportunities: Local food banks, tutoring programs, or animal shelters offer fulfilling social engagement.
• Campus recreation programs: Join a fitness class, outdoor adventure trip, or simply use campus gym facilities with friends.

What to Look for in ANY Organization

Before joining any group, students should verify:

• ☑️ Clear written anti-hazing policy: This should be readily available and adhered to.
• ☑️ Faculty or staff advisor actively involved: A genuine advisor acts as an oversight and mentorship figure.
• ☑️ Transparent membership process: Avoid groups with “secret” phases or undisclosed activities.
• ☑️ No “pledging” period with undisclosed activities: If they can’t tell you what it involves, that’s a red flag.
• ☑️ Open meetings: Observe a meeting before committing to ensure the culture aligns with your values.
• ☑️ Current members willing to discuss experiences honestly: Look for authenticity, not coded language.

Red Flags to Avoid

• 🚩 “What happens here stays here” culture: A demand for secrecy is a hallmark of hazing.
• 🚩 Excessive time demands: Especially ones that interfere with academics or sleep.
• 🚩 Required alcohol consumption: Directly or indirectly pressured drinking is hazing and illegal for minors.
• 🚩 “New member education” with vague descriptions: If they can’t explain it, it’s likely problematic.
• 🚩 Sleep deprivation expectations: Constant late nights or early mornings.
• 🚩 Financial demands beyond standard dues: Hidden costs, “fines,” or coerced purchases.

9. ABOUT THE MANGINELLO LAW FIRM + CALL TO ACTION

When your family in Armstrong County faces a hazing crisis, you need more than just a lawyer; you need legal emergency responders who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, we are committed to providing that level of expertise and advocacy.

We are a Houston-based Texas personal injury firm with deep experience in serious injury, wrongful death, and institutional accountability cases. Our firm’s unique strengths are particularly suited to the complexities of hazing litigation:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, leverages her background as a former insurance defense attorney at a national defense firm. She knows the insurance companies’ playbook inside and out—the tactics they use to undervalue claims, their delay strategies, and their arguments for coverage exclusions. We know their playbook because we used to run it. Lupe Peña’s complete professional profile is available at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.

• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Ralph P. Manginello, our managing partner, is a seasoned litigator with over 25 years of experience. He was one of the few Texas attorneys involved in the high-stakes BP Texas City explosion litigation and has extensive federal court experience (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas). We are not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their formidable defense teams; we’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won. Ralph Manginello’s complete credentials can be found at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/.

• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have a proven track record of securing significant results in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. This includes collaborating with economists to meticulously value lifetime care needs for victims of brain injuries or permanent disabilities. We understand the true cost of these tragedies, and we don’t settle cheap; we build cases that compel real accountability and compensation. Our wrongful death practice areas are detailed at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/.

• Dual Civil and Criminal Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s active membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides us with a nuanced understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual expertise is invaluable whether you’re a victim, a parent, or even a witness facing potential criminal exposure. Our criminal defense capabilities are available at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/.

• Investigative Depth and Modern Evidence Collection: We understand that modern hazing investigations demand cutting-edge techniques. Our team partners with digital forensics experts to recover deleted group chats, social media evidence, and other hidden digital footprint. We are skilled at subpoenaing national fraternity records, uncovering university files through discovery and public records requests, and working with top medical and psychological experts to meticulously document the full extent of harm. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does. Watch our video on using your phone to document a legal case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs

We understand how fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments operate behind closed doors. We know the cultural nuances and how to prove coercion. Our approach is empathetic, recognizing the profound pain and confusion hazing inflicts. We aim to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and contribute to preventing such tragedies from happening to another family.

Call to Action for Armstrong County Families

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

Contact The Manginello Law Firm for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We will listen to your story without judgment, review any evidence you have, explain your legal options transparently, and help you decide on the best path forward for your family. There’s no pressure to hire us on the spot; our priority is to provide you with clear information to make an informed decision. Everything you tell us is confidential. Learn about our contingency fee model (we don’t get paid unless we win) here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc

You don’t have to face this alone. Whether you’re in Armstrong County, or dealing with an incident in Houston, College Station, Austin, Dallas, or Waco, our dedicated team is here to help.

Call Attorney911 for immediate legal assistance:

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

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

Whether you’re from Claude, Goodnight, or anywhere across the Texas Panhandle, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to walk this path alone. Call us today.

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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