Callahan County Fraternity Hazing Attorneys | $24M Pi Kappa Alpha Settlements Exposed | Attorney911 — The Firm That Shut Down Pi Kappa Phi’s Beta Nu | Federal Court | Former Insurance Defense | 1-888-ATTY-911

If a student at McMurry University, a private university many Callahan County families choose for higher education, is pressured to down an entire bottle of liquor during an “initiation ritual” at an off-campus fraternity house, then collapses and no one calls for help until it’s too late — that’s hazing. If a new member of the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets, a storied institution in Callahan County’s home state, is forced into degrading physical acts and sexually suggestive poses in a remote location, only to suffer lasting psychological trauma — that’s hazing.

These aren’t abstract scenarios from far-off campuses, but concrete dangers that families across Texas, including right here in Callahan County, face when their children pursue higher education. The allure of belonging can sometimes mask a dark undercurrent of abuse, shrouded in “tradition” and enforced by secrecy. The promise of brotherhood or sisterhood can quickly unravel into a nightmare of physical harm, psychological torment, or even death.

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

Texas Hazing Law Guide for Families in Callahan County

This is a comprehensive guide to hazing and the law in Texas, written for families in Callahan County and across Texas who need to understand:

• What hazing looks like in 2025 (not just the old stereotypes).
• How Texas and federal law treat hazing.
• What we can learn from major national cases and how they apply to Texas families.
• What has been happening at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor (and other Texas schools).
• What legal options victims and families in Callahan County and throughout Texas may have.

Even if your child attends school far from Callahan County, Texas hazing law and experienced Texas counsel can help. From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Callahan County and surrounding areas. We understand that hazing at Texas universities affects families in Callahan County and across the region, especially those whose children attend schools like McMurry University in Abilene or other institutions frequently chosen by Callahan County families.

We are committed to providing straight answers and aggressive advocacy when hazing turns tragic. This article is general information, not specific legal advice. The Manginello Law Firm can evaluate individual cases based on their specific facts.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Callahan County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or collegiate traditions, hazing has evolved far beyond the pranks seen in old movies. It’s a complex, often brutal, system of abuse designed to assert power, break down individuality, and enforce loyalty through suffering. According to hazing prevention research from organizations like StopHazing.org, hazing can be categorized into three escalating tiers, each causing distinct harms.

Three-Tier Hazing Classification System

Tier 1: Subtle Hazing – The Foundation of Control

Subtle hazing often disguises itself as harmless fun, tradition, or simply a way to build camaraderie. However, these behaviors establish a power imbalance, normalize secrecy, and set the stage for more severe abuse. It creates psychological harm and erodes trust.

• Deception and Secrecy: New members are told to lie to parents, university officials, or outsiders about fraternity/sorority activities. They are often made to swear oaths of silence.
• Servitude: Requiring new members to perform chores for older members – running errands, cleaning rooms, acting as designated drivers at odd hours. This creates a constant state of availability and subservience.
• Social Isolation and Control: Limiting new members’ contact with non-members, dictating who they can socialize with, or requiring permission to attend social events outside the organization.
• Deprivation of Privileges: For instance, new members may not be allowed to speak unless spoken to, sit in certain areas, or use specific entrances.
• Interference with Academics: Mandatory late-night meetings, study hours, or tasks that deliberately conflict with academic responsibilities (especially during exams), leading to sleep deprivation and stress.
• “Scavenger Hunts” or “Tasks”: Ostensibly innocent, these often involve humiliating acts, theft of items, or public stunts designed to embarrass or put new members at risk.

Modern Digital Evolutions:

• Constant Digital Monitoring: New members are added to group chats and expected to respond instantly, day or night. Failure to comply can lead to punishment.
• Location Sharing: Requiring pledges to share their live location via apps like “Find My Friends” or Snapchat Maps, creating a sense of being constantly watched and controlled.
• Social Media Policing: Controlling what new members can post online, demanding they “like” or share organizational content, or preventing them from posting on their own terms.

Tier 2: Harassment Hazing – Causing Emotional and Physical Discomfort

This tier escalates beyond subtle control, directly inflicting emotional or physical discomfort, though usually without lasting physical injury. It creates a hostile and abusive environment.

• Verbal Abuse: Yelling, screaming, insults, belittling language, and threats designed to intimidate and degrade.
• Intense Sleep Deprivation: Prolonged late-night “meetings,” mandatory activities, or wake-up calls (e.g., at 3 AM) that disrupt sleep cycles and lead to mental and physical exhaustion.
• Food/Water Restriction: Limiting access to meals, forcing consumption of unpleasant substances (like hot sauce or large quantities of bland food), or restricting water intake.
• Forced Physical Activity: Mandatory strenuous exercises, “smokings” (intense calisthenics), forced runs, or “workouts” that push new members beyond safe limits, often framed as “conditioning.”
• Public Humiliation: Forcing new members to perform embarrassing acts in public, wear degrading costumes, or endure “grilling” sessions where they are verbally attacked by older members.
• Exposure to Unsanitary Conditions: Forcing new members into dirty spaces or covering them with repugnant, non-harmful substances like eggs, condiments, or mud.

Modern Digital Evolutions:

• Forced “Voluntary” Participation: Hazing activities are sometimes labeled as “optional,” but new members know that refusing means social exclusion, denial of a “big/little,” or being seen as “not committed.”
• Digital Humiliation: Forcing new members to post embarrassing content on social media (e.g., TikTok, Instagram), or participate in humiliating online “challenges” and then sharing these widely within the group.
• “Meme Culture” Hazing: Creating and sharing mocking memes or videos of specific pledges within private group chats.

Tier 3: Violent Hazing – High Potential for Serious Injury or Death

This tier involves activities with a high likelihood of causing physical harm, severe psychological trauma, sexual assault, or even death. This is the most dangerous form of hazing, and often involves illegal acts.

• Forced Alcohol/Substance Consumption: This is the most common cause of hazing deaths. It includes “line-up” drinking games, forced chugging, funneling, or keg stands with hard liquor, or any activity where pledges are coerced into consuming dangerous amounts of alcohol. Specific patterns like the “Big/Little” reveal where new members are given entire bottles of liquor are lethal.
• Physical Beatings and Paddling: Inflicting direct physical harm through punches, kicks, slaps, or the use of paddles. “Branding” with hot objects or forced tattoos is also violent hazing.
• Dangerous Physical “Tests”: Activities like the “glass ceiling” ritual (blindfolded tackling), forced fights, jumping from heights while intoxicated, or being forced to swim in dangerous conditions.
• Sexualized Hazing: Forced nudity, simulated sexual acts, sexual assault, coerced masturbation, or forcing new members to participate in sexually degrading behaviors.
• Racist/Discriminatory Hazing: Using slurs, forcing new members to role-play degrading stereotypes, or subjecting them to acts that exploit their cultural, racial, or gender identity.
• Kidnapping/Restraint: Abducting new members, blindfolding them, tying them up, or physically restraining them, often in remote locations.
• Extreme Environmental Exposure: Forcing new members to endure harsh weather conditions (e.g., being left outside in extreme cold), locking them in small spaces, or depriving them of bathroom access for extended periods.

Modern Digital Evolutions:

• “Retreat” Hazing: Moving violent hazing activities to off-campus, unmonitored locations such as Airbnbs, private cabins, or secluded private properties to evade university oversight and surveillance.
• Disguised as “Team Building”: Dangerous activities framed as character-building or team-bonding exercises (e.g., extreme “boot camp” style workouts that result in injury).
• Fire/Chemical Hazing: Disturbingly, there have been cases of pledges being set on fire or having industrial chemicals poured on them, resulting in severe burns.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception that hazing is limited to fraternities. While Greek life often faces public scrutiny, hazing exists across a wide spectrum of collegiate and youth organizations.

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes social Greek-letter organizations under various councils (Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council, Multicultural Greek Council).
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-style Groups: The tradition-heavy, structured environments of military training programs can sometimes foster hazing rituals, as has been seen in multiple incidents, including at Texas A&M.
• Spirit Squads and Tradition Clubs: Organizations like spirit teams, campus clubs dedicated to specific traditions (e.g., Texas Cowboys at UT Austin), or even cheerleading squads have been known to engage in hazing.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming and track, hazing can occur in competitive sports, often under the guise of “team bonding” or “toughening up” new recruits.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups like marching bands, a cappella groups, or theater clubs have had documented hazing incidents involving physical and psychological abuse.
• Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: Any group where status, hierarchy, and a desire to belong are strong can become a breeding ground for hazing, regardless of its stated mission.

Hazing persists because of deeply ingrained factors such as gaining social status, maintaining “traditions,” and an enforced code of secrecy that discourages reporting. These practices are often passed down through generations of members, despite official prohibitions.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

For families in Callahan County, understanding the legal landscape of hazing in Texas is crucial. Both state and federal laws, as well as institutional policies, aim to prevent hazing and provide avenues for accountability.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Under Texas law—which governs cases in Callahan County—hazing is broadly defined in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. It focuses on the act of endangering a student’s health or safety for the purpose of affiliation with an organization.

Hazing Definition in Texas (Texas Education Code § 37.151):

Hazing means 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.

Plain English: Whether for joining a fraternity at Abilene Christian or maintaining status in a club at McMurry University, if a student is made to do something dangerous, unhealthy, humiliating, or mentally damaging, and the people involved were aware of or reckless about the risk, that’s hazing under Texas law. The focus is on the harm and the purpose of the act, not necessarily malicious intent.

Key Provisions of Texas Hazing Law:

• Location Doesn’t Matter: Hazing can occur on or off campus (Texas Education Code § 37.151). This means an Airbnb rental outside of Abilene, a private off-campus house, or a remote ranch still falls under the law’s purview.
• Mental or Physical Harm: The harm doesn’t have to be physical. Psychological hazing that endangers mental health or safety is equally prohibited.
• Recklessness is Enough: The law doesn’t require intent to cause harm; “reckless” behavior (knowing of and disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk) is sufficient.
• Consent is Not a Defense: Crucially, Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the hazing activity. Courts recognize that “consent” is often coerced under peer pressure and power imbalances.

Criminal Penalties (Texas Education Code § 37.152):

The severity of criminal penalties for hazing in Texas depends on the injury caused:

• Class B Misdemeanor: The default for basic hazing violations (punishable by up to 180 days in county jail, a fine of up to $2,000, or both).
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury to another person.
• State Jail Felony: If the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. This is a critical distinction, meaning severe hazing can lead to felony charges in Texas.

Additionally, individuals who are aware of hazing and fail to report it can face misdemeanor charges, as can those who retaliate against someone who reports hazing.

Organizational Liability (Texas Education Code § 37.153):

Student organizations themselves can be held criminally responsible:

• An organization can be fined up to $10,000 for a hazing violation.
• A university can revoke the organization’s recognition and prohibit it from operating on campus.
• An organization is criminally liable if it authorized or encouraged the hazing, or if an officer or member acting in an official capacity knew about the hazing and failed to report it.

Plain English: This means both individual students and the groups they belong to can be criminally charged, illustrating why Callahan County families should explore all legal avenues available.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Understanding the Pathways to Justice

When hazing occurs, families in Callahan County may encounter two distinct legal processes simultaneously: criminal and civil cases. Understanding their differences is key to pursuing justice.

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated by the state (prosecutors) and aim to punish unlawful behavior. In hazing incidents, prosecutors might pursue charges for hazing itself (as outlined in the Texas Education Code), assault, furnishing alcohol to minors, or even negligent homicide or manslaughter in cases of severe injury or death. The goal is to enforce public laws and deter future criminal acts.
• Civil Cases: These are brought by the victim (or their family, in wrongful death cases) against the individuals and entities believed responsible for the harm. The primary goal is monetary compensation for damages suffered, as well as accountability. Civil hazing lawsuits often involve claims of negligence, gross negligence, wrongful death, negligent supervision, or premises liability. A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for a civil case; the standards of proof are different.

Both pathways can run concurrently, and Attorney911 handles both the criminal and civil aspects of hazazing cases.

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

Beyond Texas state law, federal regulations significantly impact how hazing is addressed on college campuses, providing additional layers of protection and potential avenues for accountability for Callahan County families.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This crucial federal law enhances transparency and prevention efforts at institutions receiving federal funding. It mandates that colleges:

  • Publicly report all hazing incidents, including the nature of the violation and disciplinary actions taken.
  • Implement comprehensive hazing education and prevention programs for students and staff.
  • Maintain accessible public data on hazing incidents, a requirement that began phasing in during 2025 and will be fully implemented by around 2026. This means more information will be available to Callahan County families researching potential hazing histories at colleges across the nation.

• Title IX: When hazing involves sex-based discrimination, sexual harassment, or sexual assault, Title IX is triggered. This federal law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any federally funded education program or activity. Universities have clear obligations to investigate, respond to, and prevent such conduct, regardless of whether it occurred on- or off-campus. This is particularly relevant given the prevalence of sexualized hazing.

• 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. Hazing incidents, especially those involving assault, sexual assault, or alcohol/drug violations, can fall under Clery reporting requirements, providing another layer of transparency.

Who Can Be Held Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit?

When a student from Callahan County is harmed by hazing, multiple parties may bear legal responsibility. Identifying all potential defendants is a key part of building a strong civil hazing case.

• Individual Students: Those who actively participated in, ordered, or oversaw the hazing activities are directly liable for their actions. This includes chapter officers, “pledgemasters,” and even general members who failed to intervene.
• Local Chapter/Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself can be sued if it operated as a legal entity and its leadership directly or indirectly contributed to the hazing.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: Most Greek-letter organizations are part of larger national bodies. These national headquarters often have anti-hazing policies, risk management guidelines, and the authority to oversee local chapters. If a national organization knew or should have known about a pattern of hazing (especially given its history in other chapters) and failed to take adequate preventive or corrective action, it can be held liable.
• University or Governing Board: Colleges and universities have a duty to protect their students within certain limits. Liability can arise if a university knew or should have known about hazing and acted with deliberate indifference, failed to enforce its own policies, or was negligent in its supervision of student organizations. Sovereign immunity often protects public universities (like UT Austin, Texas A&M, UH) from certain lawsuits, but important exceptions exist for gross negligence, civil rights violations, or when the acts of an individual employee are at issue. Private universities (like SMU or Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections.
• Third Parties: This can include:
  • Property Owners/Landlords: If the hazing occurred on property not owned by the university (e.g., an off-campus fraternity house, an Airbnb), the property owner might be liable if they knew or should have known about dangerous activities occurring there.
  • Alcohol Providers: Bars, liquor stores, or individuals who illegally provided alcohol to underage students that contributed to a hazing incident could face dram shop liability.
  • Event Organizers: Any third-party company hired to organize an event where hazing occurred might face liability if they failed to maintain a safe environment.

Every hazing case has unique facts, and not every party will be liable in every situation. An experienced hazing attorney can thoroughly investigate to identify all potential responsible parties and hold them accountable.

National Hazing Case Patterns: Lessons for Callahan County Families

The national headlines of hazing tragedies may seem distant, but they cast a long shadow over every college campus, including those attended by students from Callahan County. These landmark cases, leading to substantial legal accountability and legislative reform, provide crucial insights into the patterns of hazing, the foreseeability of its dangers, and the legal strategies required to fight it.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern: A Repeating Script

Time and again, the most common and deadliest form of hazing involves forced alcohol consumption. These incidents demonstrate a predictable pattern of extreme intoxication, often coupled with a deliberate delay in seeking medical help due to fear of repercussions.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): In one of the most publicized hazing cases in U.S. history, 19-year-old pledge Timothy Piazza died after a “bid-acceptance” event where he was pressured into rapid, dangerous alcohol consumption. Security camera footage revealed he suffered multiple falls and injuries, yet members delayed calling 911 for nearly 12 hours. This led to over 1,000 criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the enactment of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. For Callahan County families, this case underscores that extreme intoxication, delayed medical attention, and a pervasive culture of silence are lethal and legally indefensible.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): During a “Big Brother Night,” pledge Andrew Coffey, 20, was pressured to consume massive amounts of alcohol, including an entire handle of liquor, dying of acute alcohol poisoning. Multiple criminal prosecutions followed, and Florida State temporarily suspended all Greek life, initiating a comprehensive policy overhaul. This case tragically illustrates how ritualized drinking, often disguised as tradition, is a recurring script for disaster, signaling a clear pattern to national organizations.
• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, 18, died after a “Bible study” drinking game where pledges were forced to consume alcohol if they answered questions incorrectly. His blood alcohol content was 0.495%. His death directly led to Louisiana enacting the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing law. For Texas families, the legislative change following this tragedy proves that public outrage and undeniable evidence of hazing can compel real legal consequences. A civil lawsuit for $6.1 million was awarded to the family, with other settlements as well.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): During a “Big/Little” pledge night, 20-year-old Stone Foltz was forced to consume an entire bottle of whiskey and died of alcohol poisoning. This resulted in multiple criminal convictions against fraternity members. His family later reached a $10 million settlement, with approximately $7 million from Pi Kappa Alpha national and ~$3 million from Bowling Green State University. This case is a stark reminder to Callahan County parents that universities, alongside fraternities, can face significant financial and reputational accountability for hazing-related deaths. It also led to Ohio’s Collin’s Law, strengthening anti-hazing measures.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern: Beyond Alcohol

While alcohol is frequently involved, hazing also encompasses severe physical and psychologically damaging rituals that can lead to death, even without intoxication.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, 19, died during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains after being subjected to a brutal “glass ceiling” ritual, where he was blindfolded, weighted down, and repeatedly tackled. Fraternity members delayed calling 911 for an hour, which proved critical. This case was groundbreaking, leading to the criminal conviction of the national fraternity itself for aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, and its 10-year ban from Pennsylvania. For Texas families who might assume hazing only happens on campus, this case highlights that off-campus retreats and unofficial events are often even more dangerous, and national organizations bear heavy responsibility.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse: Not Just Greek Life

Hazing is endemic across various student groups. High-profile athletic scandals demonstrate that hazing is not confined to Greek organizations.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): A massive scandal erupted at Northwestern, where former football players alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program spanning multiple years. This included forced sexual acts, racial slurs, and physical abuse. The fallout included the firing of long-time head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed a wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university, leading to a confidential settlement. Multiple injured players also sued Northwestern. This case powerfully illustrates that hazing can permeate highly visible and well-funded athletic programs, raising profound questions about institutional oversight that are relevant to all major sports programs in Texas.

What These National Cases Mean for Callahan County Families

For families in Callahan County, these national tragedies are not isolated incidents but potent lessons that directly inform the risks and legal strategies for hazing cases in Texas.

• Common Threads of Danger: The recurring patterns observed across these cases—forced drinking, ritualized humiliation, physical violence, deliberate delay in seeking medical care, and systematic cover-ups—paint a clear picture of predictable dangers that institutions and organizations should know to prevent.
• Accountability Through Litigation: These cases have consistently resulted in significant criminal charges, multi-million dollar civil settlements and verdicts, and far-reaching legislative reforms. This demonstrates that legal action can compel accountability from individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and universities.
• Precedent for Texas Courts: While each state’s laws may differ in specifics, the legal principles established in these national cases—particularly regarding negligence, foreseeability, and institutional liability—are influential in Texas courts. A national organization’s history of hazing at one campus can be powerful evidence in a Texas lawsuit, proving they were on notice of the risks.
• The Call for Prevention: Ultimately, these tragic lessons amplify the urgent call for genuine hazing prevention efforts and underscore the need for decisive legal intervention when prevention fails.

Callahan County families who encounter hazing at any Texas campus are thus operating within a legal and social landscape that is increasingly shaped by these national precedents and the fierce advocacy of victims’ families.

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

For Callahan County families, understanding hazing within Texas’s major universities is paramount. Each institution, from large public schools like UT Austin and Texas A&M to private universities like SMU and Baylor, has its own culture, policies, and history of addressing—or failing to address—hazing. While Callahan County residents may primarily engage with local Abilene universities like McMurry or Hardin-Simmons, many also send their children to these larger state institutions, making their hazing records highly relevant.

5.1 University of Houston (UH): An Urban Giant’s Hazing Challenges

The University of Houston, a bustling urban campus in Callahan County’s home state, serves a diverse student body and maintains a robust Greek life. UH’s experiences with hazing, including a significant case handled by Attorney911, underscore the persistent challenges even large, modern universities face.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (Houston/Harris County Proximity)

The University of Houston is a sprawling public research university, home to over 47,000 students. Its vibrant campus culture is characterized by its urban energy, diverse student population, and a thriving Greek life scene comprising organizations under the Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council, and Multicultural Greek Council. Many families from throughout Texas, including those in Callahan County, choose UH for its strong academic programs and dynamic city environment. While Callahan County is significantly west of Houston, it’s common for students from all parts of Texas to attend UH, and for former Houston-area students to relocate to Callahan County.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at UH

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, clearly prohibiting any acts that endanger the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. UH’s policy explicitly bans activities such as forced alcohol/food/drug consumption, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and any acts causing mental distress. The university outlines several channels for reporting hazing, including the Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). UH also posts a general statement regarding hazing on its website, encouraging reporting and outlining disciplinary actions.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at UH

UH has wrestled with a recurring pattern of hazing. One of the most significant recent cases involving hazing at UH saw Attorney911 file a lawsuit against multiple defendants:

• Leonel Bermudez v. University of Houston / Pi Kappa Phi (2025): In late 2025, Attorney911 (Ralph Manginello and Lupe Peña) filed a lawsuit against the University of Houston, its Board of Regents, Pi Kappa Phi national headquarters, its local housing corporation, and 13 individual fraternity leaders/members on behalf of Leonel Bermudez. Bermudez, a transfer student and pledge of the Pi Kappa Phi Beta Nu chapter, suffered severe injuries including rhabdomyolysis and acute kidney failure after alleged hazing rituals.
  • Hazing Allegations: The lawsuit details extensive hazing, including:
    • Pledges forced to carry humiliating fanny packs containing condoms, sex toys, and nicotine devices, with threats of punishment for non-compliance.
    • Enforced dress codes and mandatory hours-long “study/work” blocks.
    • Overnight driving duties, sprints, bear crawls, and “save-your-brother” drills.
    • Cold-weather exposure in underwear and being forced to lie in vomit-soaked grass.
    • Allegations of hose spraying “similar to waterboarding” and threats of actual waterboarding.
    • Forced consumption of milk, hot dogs, and peppercorns until vomiting, followed by immediate sprints.
    • A particularly brutal workout on November 3, 2025, at Yellowstone Boulevard Park in Houston, involving over 100 push-ups and 500 squats, which left Bermudez unable to stand.
    • An incident on October 13 involving another pledge being hog-tied face-down with an object in his mouth for over an hour.
  • Medical Outcome: Bermudez passed brown urine, a classic symptom of rhabdomyolysis, and experienced acute kidney failure, requiring a four-day hospitalization. He faces ongoing risks of permanent kidney damage and long-term physical and psychological harm. As Ralph Manginello stated, “His urine was brown,” highlighting the severity. Lupe Peña added, “If this prevents harm to another person…Let’s bring this to light. Enough is enough.”
  • Institutional Response: The Pi Kappa Phi Beta Nu chapter was suspended by the national HQ on November 6, 2025, and members voted to surrender their charter on November 14, permanently shutting down the chapter. UH released a statement calling the conduct “deeply disturbing” and promised disciplinary measures up to expulsion.
  • Media Coverage: The case received significant media attention from local outlets like 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/), and 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

Hazing cases originating at the University of Houston would involve legal processes within the Houston metropolitan area. Civil lawsuits against the university, national fraternities, and individuals would typically be filed in Harris County civil courts. Criminal investigations might involve the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) or the Houston Police Department, depending on where the specific incidents occurred. For Callahan County families, this means the legal battleground would be in a major urban center with extensive resources.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For UH students and their families:

• Familiarize yourselves with UH’s anti-hazing policy and official reporting channels, including the Dean of Students Office and UHPD.
• If hazing occurs off-campus, remember that it’s still hazing under Texas law, and the Houston Police Department or Harris County Sheriff’s Office may also have jurisdiction.
• Be critical of “traditions” that involve secrecy, excessive drinking, or physical degradation. Your safety and well-being should always come first.
• Contacting a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases, especially one familiar with the local court system and the university’s past conduct records, is vital for navigating such complex litigation.

5.2 Texas A&M University: Traditions, Cadets, and Compliance

Texas A&M, known for its deep-rooted traditions and the revered Corps of Cadets, presents a unique backdrop for hazing issues. The blend of military culture and Greek life requires continuous vigilance. Many Callahan County families who send their children to Texas A&M in College Station are deeply invested in these traditions.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (Callahan County-Relevant)

Texas A&M University in College Station, a short drive from Callahan County, is deeply woven into the fabric of Texas, attracting students from across the state, including many from rural counties like Callahan. Known for its rich traditions, strong alumni network, and, of course, the Corps of Cadets, A&M fosters a unique sense of identity and loyalty. This culture can, at times, inadvertently create environments where hazing is cloaked in the guise of tradition or “team building,” making it challenging for students and families to discern genuine camaraderie from abuse. A&M maintains strong Greek life and numerous other student organizations that contribute to its vibrant campus. For Callahan County families, Texas A&M is a highly popular choice for university education, making its policies and history around hazing highly relevant.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at Texas A&M

Texas A&M’s anti-hazing policy is stringent, explicitly prohibiting any activity that “endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student” for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. This applies to all student organizations, including Greek-letter groups and the Corps of Cadets. The university emphasizes anonymous reporting options through various channels, including the Division of Student Affairs, the Corps of Cadets leadership, and the University Police Department (UPD).

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at Texas A&M

Over the years, Texas A&M has faced multiple hazing allegations across both its Greek life and the Corps of Cadets, highlighting the pervasive nature of the problem within institutions with strong traditions.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Chemical Burns Lawsuit (around 2021): This disturbing incident involved two pledges alleging they were subjected to strenuous physical activity and then had various substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, poured over them. This resulted in severe chemical burns that required skin graft surgeries. The pledges subsequently filed a $1 million lawsuit against the fraternity chapter. The university suspended the SAE chapter for two years. Such an incident highlights the extreme and dangerous forms hazing can take, even among supposedly “brotherly” organizations.
• Corps of Cadets Hazing (2023 Lawsuit): A lawsuit filed in 2023 alleged degrading hazing practices within the Corps of Cadets. A cadet claimed he was forced into simulated sexual acts and was bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million in damages. Texas A&M responded by stating that it had handled the matter under its severe disciplinary rules. This case demonstrates that hazing extends beyond Greek life into other highly structured and revered campus groups and that even these organizations are not immune from legal accountability.
• Phi Gamma Delta (2018): Pledge Joseph Little collapsed and died in August 2018 during pledging activities found by administrators to be hazing acts. He had been accepted into Phi Gamma Delta (Fiji). The death was initially called suspicious by law enforcement.
• Texas A&M University (Corps of Cadets) (1984): Cadet Bruce Dean Goodrich, 20, died from heatstroke while performing strenuous exercises at 2:30 a.m. during a hazing ritual. One student was found guilty of destroying evidence (a company exercise schedule), and three pleaded guilty to hazing.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

Legal actions stemming from hazing at Texas A&M would involve Brazos County courts for civil claims, and UPD or relevant local law enforcement for criminal investigations. For Callahan County families, initiating legal proceedings would likely mean navigating a large, institutional defendant in College Station rather than local Callahan County courts. Potential defendants could include individuals, the local chapter, national organizations, and the university itself, particularly given the Corps of Cadets’ direct university oversight.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents connected to Texas A&M:

• Be critical of “traditions” that involve secrecy, physical discomfort, or degrading acts, particularly within the Corps of Cadets, athletic teams, and Greek life.
• Utilize A&M’s reporting channels, including anonymous options, if you suspect hazing.
• Document every detail – physical injuries, text messages, witness accounts – as it can be crucial evidence.
• Seek immediate legal counsel if hazing occurs. A lawyer experienced in hazing can help navigate the complexities of A&M’s internal disciplinary process and pursue a civil claim, focusing on all relevant parties.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT): Transparency and Ongoing Challenges

The flagship public university of Texas, UT Austin is a powerhouse of academics and student life. Its proactive approach to publishing hazing violations offers a degree of transparency, yet the ongoing list of incidents reveals that the battle against hazing is far from over for the many Callahan County students and families who choose this major university.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (Callahan County-Relevant)

The University of Texas at Austin, located in the state capital, is a large public research university, widely considered the flagship institution of the University of Texas System. Like Texas A&M, UT Austin is a popular choice for Callahan County families, even with the drive to Travis County. The campus is known for its vibrant student life, highly competitive academics, and a very active Greek system consisting of numerous fraternities and sororities, alongside a myriad of other student organizations, spirit groups, and athletic programs. Its traditions are deeply ingrained, contributing to a strong, if sometimes problematic, emphasis on group loyalty and affiliation.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at UT

The University of Texas at Austin maintains an explicit and publicly accessible anti-hazing policy. Their official website clearly defines hazing in line with the Texas Education Code and outlines severe consequences for violations, including organizational suspension or expulsion and individual disciplinary action. Crucially, UT is one of the more transparent universities, publishing detailed reports of hazing violations, including the names of organizations involved, the nature of their offenses, and the sanctions imposed. Reporting channels are available 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 at UT

UT Austin’s public hazing log provides a grim but honest look at the ongoing struggle against hazing. This transparency, while commendable, also reveals a recurring cycle of violations.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): As documented on UT’s official hazing website (hazing.utexas.edu), the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity was found responsible for hazing after new members were directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics. This activity was deemed to endanger their health and safety. The chapter was placed on probation and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education programs. This incident highlights the persistence of physical and consumption-based hazing.
• Texas Wranglers, Spirit Organization (Various Incidents): UT’s records show that even non-Greek, tradition-heavy spirit organizations face hazing issues. The Texas Wranglers have been sanctioned for violations including forced workouts and alcohol-related hazing in multiple years. These incidents often involve activities designed to “test” new members’ endurance or commitment through physical discomfort or excessive drinking.
• Texas Cowboys (2018): In 2018, a new member of the Texas Cowboys, a spirit organization, died in a truck accident. While UT officials acknowledged hazing, including animal abuse, and expelled some members, they denied that sleep deprivation directly linked to hazing caused the death. The parents, however, attributed the death to sleep deprivation from hazing. (Texas Education Code § 37.151, which is key here, does not specifically mention sleep deprivation as a form of physical harm.)
• Phi Kappa Psi (1986): Mark Seeberger, 18, died with a blood-alcohol level of 0.43 after members encouraged a drinking game. A grand jury refused to indict anyone, but his death remains one of the earliest high-profile alcohol hazing deaths in Texas.
• Delta Kappa Epsilon (1928): In one of the earliest documented hazing deaths in Texas, pledge Nolte McElroy died from an electric shock when he had to crawl through mattresses charged with electric current.

5.3.4 How a UT Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases arising from incidents at UT Austin would involve investigations by UTPD or the Austin Police Department, depending on the location of the incident. Civil lawsuits would generally be filed in Travis County, the jurisdiction for Austin. For Callahan County families, the UT hazing log itself can be highly valuable evidence in civil litigation, demonstrating a history of violations and the university’s prior knowledge of hazing issues within specific organizations.

5.3.5 What UT Students & Parents Should Do

For UT Austin students and their families:

• Regularly check UT’s public Hazing Violations page (hazing.utexas.edu) to understand the track record of organizations on campus and make informed choices.
• Utilize UT’s robust reporting channels if you suspect hazing, understanding that the university takes these reports seriously and has disciplinary processes in place.
• Document any evidence of hazing, both digital and physical, including screenshots, medical records, and witness statements. This transparency can be a double-edged sword: helpful for reporting, but also potentially exposing your child to repercussions if not handled carefully.
• If hazing leads to serious injury or death, contact a Texas hazing attorney immediately. The public record of UT’s hazing incidents can be a powerful component of a civil claim, demonstrating a pattern of institutional knowledge and, potentially, neglect.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU): Exclusivity and Oversight

SMU, a private university in Dallas known for its elite status and vibrant social scene, faces unique challenges in addressing hazing. The desire for exclusivity amongst its Greek organizations sometimes fuels problematic initiation practices that Callahan County families sending their children to Dallas need to be aware of.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (Callahan County-Relevant)

Southern Methodist University is a prestigious private university located in Dallas, Texas. It attracts a high-achieving student body, many of whom come from affluent backgrounds. For some Callahan County families who prioritize private education, SMU is a top-tier choice. The university is renowned for its strong Greek life, which plays a central role in shaping campus social dynamics and traditions. The emphasis on exclusivity and legacy, often present within such institutions, can inadvertently create environments where hazing is rationalized as necessary for “belonging” or maintaining status.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at SMU

SMU has an unequivocal anti-hazing policy that aligns with Texas state law, prohibiting any acts that endanger the physical or mental well-being of its students. The policy specifically addresses forced consumption, physical abuse, sleep deprivation, and psychological torment tied to group affiliation. SMU provides reporting mechanisms through its Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards, the University Police Department (SMU PD), and an anonymous online reporting form. They also utilize tools like the “Real Response” platform, which allows students to report concerns via their phones.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at SMU

While private universities like SMU may not always have the same level of public transparency as state-mandated hazing logs, incidents do come to light, revealing ongoing challenges.

• Kappa Alpha Order Suspension (2017): In 2017, SMU’s Kappa Alpha Order chapter faced significant disciplinary action, including a lengthy suspension, following allegations of hazing. Reports indicated that new members were subjected to paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and severe sleep deprivation. The chapter was prohibited from recruiting new members for several years and faced strict guidelines for re-chartering, which did not occur until around 2021. This case highlights how traditional forms of physical and alcohol-related hazing still persist, even at institutions fiercely protective of their reputation.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Suspension (2020): This chapter faced a multi-year suspension for various violations, including hazing, demonstrating recurring issues across different Greek organizations at SMU.
• Other Disciplinary Actions: SMU’s Office of Student Conduct regularly investigates incidents involving various fraternities and sororities, leading to probations, suspensions, and restrictions on social activities, often stemming from alcohol violations, underage drinking, and hazing-related complaints. Details are not always as publicly granular as at state universities, but the university is actively addressing these issues.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases at SMU would involve investigations by SMU PD or the Dallas Police Department, depending on the incident’s location. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in Dallas County. For Callahan County families, it’s important to understand that while private universities have different legal immunities than public ones, they are not exempt from liability for negligence or deliberate indifference to hazing. The discovery process in a civil lawsuit can compel SMU to release internal investigation reports and other documents that a private institution might otherwise keep confidential.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For SMU students and their families:

• Be acutely aware that despite SMU’s policies, hazing can occur. Focus on the behavior, not just the organization’s name or reputation.
• Utilize SMU’s anonymous reporting tools like “Real Response” if you are concerned, as this can trigger official university investigations.
• Document any suspected hazing thoroughly, as the university’s internal records might not be as publicly accessible as those of a state school.
• If serious harm occurs, immediately contact a Texas hazing attorney. An experienced lawyer can help navigate the complexities of suing a private institution, compelling necessary information through discovery, and holding all responsible parties accountable.

5.5 Baylor University: Faith-Based Mission Meets Hazing Realities

Baylor University, a private Baptist institution in Waco, is known for its faith-based mission and strong community. However, even within this values-driven environment, hazing has surfaced, posing difficult questions for the university and for Callahan County families who trust it with their children’s education.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (Callahan County-Relevant)

Baylor University, located in Waco, Texas, is the oldest continuously operating university in Texas. As a private Baptist institution, it draws students seeking a faith-based educational experience, including many from Callahan County and throughout Texas. Baylor emphasizes community, academic excellence, and Christian values. Despite its mission, Baylor is not immune to the societal issues present at other colleges, including hazing. Its Greek life, athletic programs, and numerous student organizations all contribute to a complex social environment where a strong sense of tradition and belonging can sometimes be exploited.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at Baylor

Baylor University’s anti-hazing policy strictly prohibits hazing in accordance with Texas law. This includes any acts of physical or mental endangerment for the purpose of initiation, affiliation, or membership in any university-recognized organization. Baylor’s policy explicitly references the Texas Education Code and outlines clear disciplinary measures for individuals and organizations found responsible for hazing. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students Office, Baylor Police Department (BUPD), and an anonymous ethics and compliance hotline.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at Baylor

Baylor’s history with student conduct issues, including a high-profile sexual assault scandal involving its football program, has highlighted the challenges of institutional oversight. Hazing incidents, too, have required university intervention:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): In 2020, Baylor’s baseball program faced a significant hazing scandal that resulted in the suspension of 14 players. The university acknowledged that the hazing activities required disciplinary action, which unfolded with staggered player suspensions throughout the early season. While specific details of the hazing were not widely publicized, the incident demonstrated that hazing occurs even within high-profile athletic programs at Baylor. This case resonates with Callahan County families given the strong local ties to high school sports.
• Baylor Chamber of Commerce (1967): In one of the earliest documented hazing deaths in Texas that received widespread attention, John E. Clifton, 19, died as a pledge of the Baylor Chamber of Commerce, a social club. The cause of death was choking down a “foul concoction” and laxatives. While the state ruled the incident an accident and the then-college president initially denied it was hazing, media backlash led to a reversal of position and a ban on “physical” hazing.
• Greek Life Disciplinary Actions: While not always publicly detailed, Baylor’s Office of Student Conduct regularly handles complaints against Greek organizations, resulting in probations, suspensions, and other sanctions for violations that often include elements of hazing, underage drinking, and other misconduct. The private nature of the university means that granular details of many of these incidents may not be publicly disclosed unless through court-ordered discovery.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases at Baylor would involve investigations by BUPD or the Waco Police Department, depending on the location of the incident. Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in McLennan County courts. For Callahan County families, pursuing a claim against Baylor (a private university) might involve different legal strategies compared to public universities, as private institutions are not shielded by sovereign immunity. However, they can still mount vigorous defenses. A key aspect of litigation could involve uncovering internal university documents related to prior hazing complaints, institutional knowledge, and the enforcement of its policies.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

For Baylor students and their families:

• Do not let Baylor’s faith-based mission lead to complacency regarding hazing risks. Understand that hazing can occur in any organization where power dynamics are present.
• Familiarize yourselves with Baylor’s anti-hazing policies and use their anonymous reporting options if you suspect an incident.
• Given Baylor’s emphasis on values, challenge any “tradition” that conflicts with the university’s stated commitment to student well-being.
• If hazing results in serious harm, immediately seek legal counsel from an attorney experienced in Texas hazing law. Such legal expertise is crucial to successfully navigate the complexities of litigation against a private university and any affiliated Greek national organizations.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For Callahan County families, understanding the role of fraternities and sororities, both at the local chapter level and their national organizations, is essential. The national history of these groups profoundly influences local chapters, shaping their “traditions,” risk management policies, and, unfortunately, patterns of hazing.

6.1 Why National Histories Matter: Foreseeability and Accountability

Most fraternities and sororities at Texas universities, including those popular with Callahan County students, are part of larger national or international organizations. These national bodies often boast hundreds of chapters across the country. Critically, these national headquarters:

• Develop extensive anti-hazing manuals and risk management policies, often in direct response to past tragedies, lawsuits, and multi-million dollar settlements.
• Are acutely aware of common hazing patterns and deadly “traditions” within their own organization, as reported by prior incidents at other campuses. This knowledge includes specific drinking rituals, physical abuse methods, and other dangerous practices.

When a local chapter in Texas repeats a hazing script that has previously led to injury, death, or legal action at another chapter elsewhere, this creates a strong argument for foreseeability in a civil lawsuit. It demonstrates that the national organization (and potentially the university) was on notice of the danger. This pattern evidence can significantly strengthen claims of negligence or even support arguments for punitive damages against national entities and their local affiliates.

6.2 Organization Mapping: National Patterns Reflected in Texas

Here, we will connect some of the major fraternities and sororities present at Texas’s prominent universities to their national hazing histories, showing that patterns repeat. Please note: the inclusion of an organization here indicates national incidents or patterns. We are not alleging that every specific Texas chapter listed has engaged in hazing, but rather that families should be aware of patterns associated with the broader national organization.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike):
  • National Hazing History: This fraternity has been repeatedly embroiled in severe hazing incidents, most notably the death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University in 2021. Foltz died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire bottle of liquor. A resulting $10 million settlement included a significant portion from the national fraternity itself. Other notable past incidents include the death of David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University in 2012, also from alcohol poisoning during a pledge event, resulting in a $14 million settlement.
  • Relevance to Texas: Pi Kappa Alpha has chapters at Texas institutions, including past incidents at the University of Texas (2023, for forcing members to consume milk and do calisthenics) and Texas Tech (1976 hazing-related death during a scavenger hunt). The consistent pattern of alcohol-related hazing within the national organization directly relates to the foreseeability of such issues in Texas chapters.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE):
  • National Hazing History: Sigma Alpha Epsilon has been labeled “America’s deadliest fraternity” by some media outlets due to a disproportionate number of hazing-related deaths, primarily involving alcohol since 2000. In response, SAE nationally ended “pledging” in 2014, moving to a “brotherhood development” model, although hazing incidents have continued. Lawsuits against the national organization include allegations of traumatic brain injury (University of Alabama, 2023) and severe chemical burns from substances poured on pledges (Texas A&M, 2021, leading to a $1 million lawsuit).
  • Relevance to Texas: SAE has prominent chapters at many Texas universities, including Texas A&M (chemical burns lawsuit), University of Texas (Cross, 2006, alcohol-related fall), and Southern Methodist University (past suspensions for violations). These incidents underscore the national organization’s ongoing struggle with hazing despite its policy changes and the persistent risks for Texas students.
• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ):
  • National Hazing History: Phi Delta Theta is tragically linked to the death of Maxwell “Max” Gruver at Louisiana State University (LSU) in 2017. Gruver died of acute alcohol poisoning (BAC 0.495%) after being forced to participate in a “Bible study” drinking game. His death led to the landmark Max Gruver Act in Louisiana and a $6.1 million verdict for his family, plus additional settlements.
  • Relevance to Texas: Phi Delta Theta has chapters at Baylor, Texas A&M, and other Texas schools. The national organization’s high-profile hazing fatality makes their alleged internal anti-hazing policies subject to intense scrutiny in any Texas incidents.
• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ):
  • National Hazing History: This fraternity is connected to the death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University in 2017. Coffey died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. More recently, Attorney911 filed a $10 million lawsuit against Pi Kappa Phi (among others) on behalf of Leonel Bermudez for acute kidney failure and rhabdomyolysis sustained during hazing at the University of Houston (2025). The national organization and its local chapters have a history of alleged hazing violations involving physical endurance and forced alcohol consumption.
  • Relevance to Texas: The Bermudez case at UH is a critical, ongoing example of alleged hazing within Pi Kappa Phi in Texas, demonstrating the potential for devastating physical harm and the active pursuit of justice in Texas courts.
• Kappa Alpha Order (KA):
  • National Hazing History: Kappa Alpha Order has a history of hazing suspensions and allegations across various campuses, often involving physical activities, forced drinking, and degrading rituals. For instance, a 2017 incident at SMU led to a significant suspension.
  • Relevance to Texas: Kappa Alpha Order has chapters at Texas A&M, University of Texas, SMU, and Baylor, among others. Their prior suspensions at California’s UC Davis (1984, alcohol-related death during a graffiti-painting mission) and the University of Mississippi (1987, member died from fall after alcohol party) add to the national pattern of concern.
• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ):
  • National Hazing History: Sigma Chi has faced hazing litigation and disciplinary actions nationally, culminating in a more than $10 million damage award to a family in a 2024 hazing case at the College of Charleston, where a pledge alleged physical beatings, forced drugs/alcohol, and psychological torment.
  • Relevance to Texas: Sigma Chi has active chapters across Texas, including UT Austin (Ted B. Lyon, 2024, suicide blamed on hazing) and Texas A&M. The significant verdict in the College of Charleston case serves as a powerful new precedent for the financial liability facing fraternities in Texas and elsewhere.
• Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ):
  • National Hazing History: This historically Black fraternity has faced numerous hazing allegations and lawsuits, often involving severe physical beatings (“paddling”) and other forms of physical abuse. Incidents include a 2023 federal lawsuit at the University of Southern Mississippi where a former student alleged repeated beatings with a wooden paddle during “Hell Night” resulting in emergency surgery.
  • Relevance to Texas: Omega Psi Phi has a presence at many Texas HBCUs and public universities. Texas A&M (Harold Thomas, 1986, track death during physical hazing). The ongoing national pattern of physical hazing within the organization underscores the importance of vigilance.

6.3 Tie Back to Legal Strategy: Pattern Evidence and Settlements

This comprehensive national history directly translates into legal strategy for Callahan County families.

• Foreseeability: A recurring script of hazing incidents across a national organization’s chapters is compelling evidence that the national body was (or should have been) aware of the dangers. This knowledge can prove foreseeability, a key element in establishing negligence.
• Institutional Knowledge: Repeated warnings, prior fines, settlements, and suspensions from other campuses demonstrate that national organizations possess institutional knowledge of particular hazing methods and their risks. This makes it harder for them to claim they “didn’t know” or that a local incident was “rogue.”
• Settlement Leverage: When national organizations are shown to have a history of unaddressed hazing, plaintiffs have stronger leverage in settlement negotiations, often leading to higher compensation awards. This also encourages national organizations to pressure their chapters into better compliance.
• Insurance Battles: Knowing the national patterns and previous lawsuits can be vital in battling insurance companies who might try to deny coverage for hazing claims. Lupe Peña’s experience as a former insurance defense attorney becomes invaluable here, as she understands the insurers’ tactics for avoiding payouts.

Hazing is not confined to isolated incidents; it’s often a systemic issue embedded in the culture of certain organizations, carrying a heavy price tag when a tragedy occurs.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

For families in Callahan County pursuing a hazing lawsuit, the process is thorough and complex, requiring a legal team adept at uncovering evidence and navigating intricate legal and institutional defenses. This section outlines how hazing cases are built, the types of compensation victims can seek, and the nuanced strategies involved.

7.1 The Cornerstone of Any Case: Evidence

Modern hazing leaves a digital footprint, making evidence collection paramount. An experienced hazing attorney knows where to look and how to interpret these critical pieces.

• Digital Communications: In 2025, group chats and direct messages (DMs) are the most crucial source of evidence. These include communications from platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Snapchat, TikTok DMs, and even fraternity/sorority-specific apps. These messages often reveal planning, intent, specific instructions, participant lists, and even cover-up discussions. Screenshots, if taken correctly and comprehensively, are invaluable. Our video on using your cellphone to document a legal case (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) explains best practices for preserving screenshots and photos.
• Photos & Videos: Footage captured by members during events (even if deleted), photos shared on social media, or surveillance footage from houses/venues can show hazing in progress or the aftermath. This visual evidence can be incredibly powerful in court.
• Internal Organization Documents: Pledge manuals, initiation scripts, “tradition” lists, rules, and internal communications between local chapters and national headquarters can reveal long-standing problematic practices. Such documents are typically obtained through the discovery process in a lawsuit.
• University Records: Prior disciplinary actions against organizations, campus police incident reports, Clery Act reports, and Title IX complaints are all crucial. Public records requests can compel universities to release some of this data, providing invaluable context and demonstrating a history of prior warnings or systemic issues.
• Medical and Psychological Records: These provide irrefutable proof of harm. Emergency room reports, hospitalization records, toxicology reports (documenting alcohol or drug levels), and psychiatric evaluations (diagnosing PTSD, depression, anxiety stemming from the hazing) are vital for establishing physical and emotional damages.
• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts from other pledges, members who chose to leave, roommates, resident assistants, coaches, or bystanders provide firsthand narratives of the hazing. Former members or those with a change of heart can be particularly strong witnesses.

7.2 Damages: What Families Can Recover

When hazing causes harm, victims and their families can pursue compensation for a wide range of losses, aiming to make them financially whole and account for their suffering.

Economic Damages (Quantifiable Financial Losses)

• Medical Expenses: This covers
  • Past medical bills (ambulance, emergency room, hospitalization, surgeries, medications, rehabilitation services like physical therapy and occupational therapy).
  • Future medical expenses, including ongoing therapy, psychiatric care, prescription medications, or specialized long-term care for catastrophic injuries like brain damage or organ failure (e.g., in cases like Leonel Bermudez’s acute kidney failure).
• Lost Income & Earning Capacity:
  • Lost wages for time missed from work (for the victim or a parent who had to provide care).
  • Lost educational opportunities, including tuition for missed semesters, lost scholarships, or delayed graduation, which can impact career entry.
  • Diminished future earning capacity if the victim sustains permanent physical injuries or psychological trauma (like severe PTSD) that affects their long-term ability to work. Expert economists often calculate these lifetime losses.
• Other Economic Losses: This can cover property damage sustained during hazing (e.g., broken phones, clothing) or relocation costs if a student transfers to a new institution due to the trauma.

Non-Economic Damages (Subjective, But Legally Compensable)

These damages address the profound, non-monetary harms suffered by victims and their families.

• Physical Pain & Suffering: Compensation for the actual pain endured from injuries, as well as ongoing pain from permanent conditions. It also accounts for the loss of physical abilities, affecting daily life and recreational activities.
• Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: This category addresses the significant mental toll:
  • Diagnosed conditions such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), severe depression, anxiety, panic attacks, and suicidal ideation, all well-documented by medical psychological records.
  • Unquantifiable harm such as humiliation, shame, loss of dignity, terror, and the profound loss of trust in peers and institutions.
• Loss of Enjoyment of Life: When injuries or psychological trauma prevent a victim from participating in activities they once loved (sports, hobbies, social events), or significantly diminish their overall quality of life and the college experience they expected.

Wrongful Death Damages (For Families in Fatal Cases)

In the tragic event of a hazing-related death, like Leonel Bermudez’s case at UH, surviving family members can pursue a wrongful death claim. Attorney911 has extensive wrongful death experience (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/), having recovered millions for families in catastrophic cases. Damages include:

• Funeral and Burial Costs: Direct expenses related to the victim’s passing.
• Loss of Financial Support: If the deceased would have contributed financially to the family’s future, an expert can project these long-term financial losses.
• Loss of Companionship, Love, and Society: This is often the largest component, compensating parents, spouses, and children for the profound, irreplaceable loss of their loved one’s presence.
• Grief and Emotional Suffering: Compensation for the immense grief, sorrow, and mental anguish experienced by the surviving family members.

Punitive Damages (Punishment and Deterrence)

Punitive damages are not meant to compensate the victim but to punish defendants for particularly egregious, reckless, or malicious conduct and to deter similar behavior in the future.

• When Applicable: In Texas, punitive damages (also called exemplary damages) are awarded when the defendant’s actions involve gross negligence (an extreme degree of risk, actual awareness of the risk, and indifference to the rights/safety of others) or intentional misconduct. If an organization had numerous prior warnings about a specific hazing ritual and allowed it to continue, this could trigger punitive damages.
• Impact: They can significantly increase the total award and send a powerful message to institutions and organizations that such conduct will not be tolerated.

7.3 Strategy: Overcoming Institutional Defenses

Institutions and national organizations are formidable opponents, often employing a standard “defense playbook” to minimize liability. Attorney911, with its deep experience, is adept at dismantling these defenses. Our video on client mistakes that can ruin your injury case (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY) provides further insight into avoiding pitfalls.

• “The Pledge Consented” Argument: Defendants often claim the victim “agreed” to participate. We counter this by highlighting the power imbalance, coercion, and peer pressure inherent in hazing. Texas law explicitly states consent is not a defense, recognizing that genuine voluntary consent is impossible under duress.
• “Rogue Chapter / National Didn’t Know” Defense: National fraternities frequently try to distance themselves from local chapter acts. Our strategy involves demonstrating pattern evidence (similar hazing incidents in other chapters, proving the national body was on notice of the risk) and exposing the gap between stated anti-hazing policies and their lack of meaningful enforcement.
• “Happened Off-Campus / Not Our Property” Excuse: We argue that location doesn’t absolve responsibility. If the organization is university-recognized and operates under national oversight, or if the university knew about off-campus dangers, liability can still attach.
• “Unforeseeable Accident” Claim: Hazing incidents, especially those involving alcohol or common rituals, are rarely “unforeseeable.” We show that the risks were well-known, either through the organization’s own history, general industry knowledge, or specific warnings.
• “Sovereign Immunity” (for Public Universities): Public universities in Texas may assert sovereign immunity. However, we explore exceptions such as gross negligence, willful misconduct, violations of federal laws like Title IX, or pursuing claims against individual employees in their personal capacities. It’s important to remember that even with immunity claims, universities often settle to avoid negative publicity and the costs of litigation.
• Insurance Coverage Disputes: Insurers frequently attempt to deny coverage for hazing, arguing “intentional acts” are excluded. Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) is invaluable here. She understands how to navigate these complex disputes, argue for coverage based on negligent supervision (which can be covered), and counter delay tactics, ensuring the resources are available to compensate victims.

Building a hazing case is a monumental undertaking, but with meticulous evidence collection, an astute understanding of damages, and a proactive legal strategy, accountability can be achieved for families in Callahan County and across Texas.

Practical Guides & FAQs for Callahan County Families

Navigating the aftermath of a hazing incident can feel overwhelming for parents and students in Callahan County. Knowing what steps to take, what questions to ask, and what pitfalls to avoid is critical.

8.1 For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

Parents are often the first line of defense. Knowing the warning signs and how to react can make all the difference.

• Warning Signs Your Child May Be Being Hazed:
  • Physical: Unexplained injuries (bruises, cuts, burns), extreme fatigue, significant changes in sleep habits, sudden weight loss or gain, frequent illness, signs of alcohol/drug use. Your child might make vague or inconsistent excuses.
  • Behavioral & Emotional: Sudden secrecy about group activities (“I can’t talk about it”), withdrawal from family/friends, personality changes (anxiety, depression, irritability), increased defensiveness about the organization, fear of “getting in trouble” for speaking up, referring to “getting through this.”
  • Academic Red Flags: Dropping grades, missed classes, falling asleep in class, skipping assignments to attend “mandatory” group events.
  • Financial Red Flags: Unexpected requests for money, large expenses for the group, forced purchases of items, or “fines” that are not adequately explained.
  • Digital/Social: Excessive phone use for group chats, anxiety when the phone buzzes, deleting messages or clearing browsing history, receiving calls/texts at all hours, being forced to post embarrassing content online. Our video on using your cellphone to document a legal case (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) explains best practices for preserving screenshots and photos.
• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach them with empathy, not judgment. Start with open-ended questions like, “How are things going with your group? Are you enjoying it?” Emphasize their safety and well-being are your top priority, and that you will support them regardless of their choices about the group.
• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize medical care immediately. Document everything: take photos of injuries, screenshot any relevant messages, and write down details of what your child tells you while it’s fresh.
• Dealing with the University: Document all communications with university faculty or administrators. Ask about prior incidents involving the same organization and the school’s response.
• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing or covering up the incident, contact a lawyer experienced in hazing cases like Attorney911 immediately.

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

If you are a student in Callahan County considering joining an organization or currently pledging, these questions can help you identify hazing and plan for your safety.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Ask yourself: Do I feel unsafe, humiliated, or coerced? Am I being forced to drink or endure pain? Am I being told to keep secrets or lie? If your answer is yes to any of these, it is hazing. Real leadership development, service, or social bonding never requires you to compromise your safety, dignity, or academic success.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Groups often claim “everyone consented,” but consent given under pressure, fear of exclusion, or the threat of not “making the cut” is not true consent. Texas law agrees: consent is not a defense to hazing.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the absolute right to leave any organization at any time. If you feel unsafe leaving alone, tell someone outside the group you trust (parent, RA, trusted friend) and ask for support. Your first priority is your safety.
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: If you or a friend are in an emergency due to hazing (e.g., severe intoxication, injury), call 911 immediately. Most schools and Texas law (through “good-faith reporter” immunity) offer protections, meaning you cannot be punished for seeking help in an emergency, even if you were involved in illegal activity.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses: Breaking the Silence

If you are a former member or a witness to hazing, your role can be crucial in preventing future harm and achieving justice.

• Your Impact: Your testimony and any evidence you possess can prevent others from being harmed and hold accountable those who perpetuated unsafe practices. Witness cooperation can be pivotal in civil and criminal cases.
• Seeking Counsel: If you have concerns about your own legal exposure but wish to cooperate, seek independent legal advice. An attorney can help you understand your rights and potential protections.
• Navigating Cooperation: A lawyer can help you navigate the process of providing information, ensuring your rights are protected while still contributing to accountability.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For Callahan County families, avoiding these common errors is paramount to preserving legal options in a hazing case.

MISTAKES THAT CAN RUIN YOUR HAZING CASE:

1. Letting your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence:
   • Why it’s wrong: This can be seen as a cover-up, obstruct justice, and severely weaken your case as vital evidence is lost forever.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing or seemingly minor content.
2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly:
   • Why it’s wrong: This often leads the organization to destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defense, harming your ability to build a case.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in private, then contact Attorney911 immediately before any direct communication.
3. Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms:
   • Why it’s wrong: These documents might waive your right to pursue a lawsuit or limit your ability to seek full compensation years down the line.
   • What to do instead: Never sign any document from the university or an insurance provider without an attorney reviewing it.
4. Posting details on social media before talking to a lawyer:
   • Why it’s wrong: Public posts can be used against you, damage your credibility, and complicate the legal process by making your story inconsistent.
   • What to do instead: Document all information privately and confidentially; allow your attorney to guide any public messaging.
5. Letting your child go back to “one last meeting”:
   • Why it’s wrong: Organizations may use this opportunity to further pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that could harm a potential legal claim.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication with the organization should go through your lawyer.
6. Waiting “to see how the university handles it”:
   • Why it’s wrong: Evidence often disappears quickly (deleted messages, graduated witnesses), and the statute of limitations continues to run. Universities prioritize their own interests, not necessarily your family’s.
   • What to do instead: Act quickly to preserve evidence and consult a lawyer immediately.
7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer:
   • Why it’s wrong: Adjusters represent the insurance company’s interests, not yours. Any statement you give can be used to minimize your claim, and initial settlement offers are often lowball.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak and state that your attorney will contact them.

8.5 Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities (like UT Austin, Texas A&M, UH) have some sovereign immunity protections, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, civil rights violations (including Title IX), and when suing individual employees in their personal capacity. Private universities (like SMU, Baylor) have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on specific facts—contact Attorney911 (1-888-ATTY-911) for a case-specific analysis.
• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default, but it escalates to a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individual officers of an organization can also face misdemeanor charges for failing to report hazing that results in bodily injury.
• “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. Courts and statutes recognize that “consent” given under peer pressure, power imbalance, and fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent. Your child is the victim.
• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  Generally, in Texas, you have two years from the date of injury or death to file a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit. However, exceptions like the “discovery rule” (when the harm wasn’t immediately apparent) or tolling for minors can extend this period. Because evidence disappears and witnesses’ memories fade, time is critical. Call Attorney911 (1-888-ATTY-911) immediately. Our video on the statute of limitations (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c) provides more details.
• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of the hazing does not eliminate liability. Texas law explicitly covers hazing that occurs “on or off campus.” Universities, national organizations, and even property owners can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and whether the hazing was foreseeable. Many major hazing cases nationally have occurred at off-campus houses or remote retreats.
• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  While lawsuits are public records, many hazing cases ultimately resolve through confidential settlements before going to trial. Our firm prioritizes your family’s privacy and can take steps, where possible, to shield identities and keep settlement terms confidential while still pursuing full accountability. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for a confidential consultation to discuss your specific concerns.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action for Callahan County

When your family faces a hazing case in Texas, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who intimately understand how powerful institutions—fraternities, universities, and their insurance companies—fight back, and possess the unique expertise to win anyway. For Callahan County families, Attorney911 brings an unparalleled depth of knowledge and a track record of fighting for victims against formidable opponents.

9.1 Why Attorney911 for Hazing Cases

The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, stands out as a Texas hazing litigation authority due to a distinct combination of expertise, experience, and an unwavering commitment to victims.

• Insurance Insider Advantage with Lupe Peña: Associate Attorney Lupe Peña’s background as a former attorney for national insurance defense firms is a game-changer. She knows exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies:

  • Value (and undervalue) hazing claims.
  • Employ delay tactics to wear down victims.
  • Look for coverage exclusions to deny payouts.
  • Strategize to minimize settlements.
    “We know their playbook because we used to run it,” says Peña. This insider knowledge is invaluable for predicting and countering the defense’s moves. You can learn more about Lupe’s background at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/.

• Complex Litigation Against Corporate Goliaths with Ralph Manginello: Managing Partner Ralph Manginello’s extensive experience, including being one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, demonstrates our capability to take on billion-dollar corporations and institutional defendants. Our federal court experience (including the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) means we are not intimidated by the resources and legal teams of national fraternities, universities, or their defense counsel. We’ve taken on powerful entities and won, ensuring that Callahan County families get the justice they deserve. Learn about Ralph’s credentials at https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/.

• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death & Catastrophic Injury Experience: Attorney911 has a proven track record in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. We understand how to build cases that accurately value lifetime care needs for victims of traumatic brain injuries or organ damage, or the profound losses in wrongful death cases. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force accountability and secure meaningful compensation. Our wrongful death practice area (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/) details our commitment to these critical cases.

• Dual Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) underscores our ability to navigate both the criminal and civil aspects of hazing cases. This dual understanding is crucial because hazing often involves criminal charges alongside civil claims. We can advise on how criminal proceedings might affect your civil case, or how to advocate for your child if they face criminal exposure as a witness or even a participant under duress.

• Unmatched Investigative Depth: Winning hazing cases demands a relentless and sophisticated investigation. We go beyond surface-level reports, utilizing a network of experts including digital forensics specialists to recover deleted messages and social media content, medical professionals to interpret complex injuries like rhabdomyolysis, economists to project long-term financial impacts, and psychologists to document emotional trauma. We know how to compel hidden evidence, whether it’s through subpoenas for national fraternity records showing a history of prior incidents or through public records requests to uncover university files. Our approach is thorough because, as we saw in the Bermudez case at UH, your child’s life and future depend on it.

• Empathy and Victim Advocacy: We understand that facing a hazing incident is one of the hardest things a family can endure. Our firm combines aggressive legal advocacy with genuine empathy. We’re here to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and fight to prevent similar tragedies from happening again. From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Callahan County and surrounding areas, understanding that hazing at Texas universities impacts communities far and wide.

9.2 Call to Action for Callahan County Families

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

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 for your family.

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We will listen to your story with compassion and without judgment.
• We’ll review any evidence you have – photos, texts, group chat screenshots, medical records.
• We’ll explain your legal options: a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, pursuing both, or whether other avenues are more appropriate.
• We’ll discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
• We’ll answer all your questions about costs. We work on a contingency fee basis, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case. Our video explaining contingency fees (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc) provides more detail.
• There is 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 Callahan County or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone. Don’t let precious time or critical evidence disappear.

Contact Attorney911 – The Legal Emergency Lawyers™ Today:

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

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

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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