When Tradition Crosses the Line: A Crucial Guide to Hazing and Accountability for Burnet County Families

The Texas autumn brings with it the excitement of college life: new classes, new friends, and the allure of joining a fraternity, sorority, or university organization. For many young people in Burnet County, the dream of college extends beyond academics—it includes finding a community, building lifelong bonds, and participating in rich traditions. But sometimes, behind the veneer of tradition, a dangerous truth hides: hazing.

Imagine a scene that could easily unfold not far from Marble Falls or Burnet, perhaps on a highway leading to Austin or College Station. It’s “initiation week” for a prominent fraternity. Your child, a bright student from Burnet County, is part of a group of pledges driven late at night to a remote location. They’re told to perform strenuous physical activities, forced to drink far beyond their limit, or endure humiliating rituals while older members chant and film on their phones. Someone gets hurt—maybe they pass out, throw up uncontrollably, or can’t stand because their body is failing. Fear grips the group: fear of “getting caught,” fear of “getting the chapter shut down,” fear of betraying their supposed brothers or sisters. Your child feels utterly trapped, caught between desperate loyalty to a group they desperately want to join and their own rapidly declining safety.

This isn’t a fictional drama. It’s a scenario that has played out on campuses across Texas, with tragic consequences. Our firm, Attorney911, has seen firsthand how quickly the promise of brotherhood or sisterhood can devolve into life-altering trauma. We represent families who have faced the devastating reality of hazing, including a significant recent case involving a University of Houston student who suffered acute kidney failure.

This comprehensive guide is designed for families in Burnet County and across Texas who need to understand the stark realities of hazing today. We’ll explore:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, moving beyond outdated stereotypes.
• The Texas legal frameworks governing hazing, including criminal and civil liabilities.
• How national hazing tragedies have shaped the legal landscape and what this means for Texas families.
• Specific incidents and cultural contexts at major Texas universities, including the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor University.
• The critical role of evidence, damages, and strategic legal action in building a successful hazing case.
• Practical guides and FAQs for parents, students, and witnesses, empowering you with actionable steps.

Even if your child attends school far from Burnet County, Texas hazing law and experienced Texas counsel can provide crucial support. We serve families throughout Texas, offering local understanding with statewide reach.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

• If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

• In the first 48 hours:

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

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

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

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For families in Burnet County and across Texas, the image of hazing might be stuck in the past—harmless pranks or mild inconveniences. But in 2025, modern hazing is far more insidious, dangerous, and often digitally enabled. It’s no longer just about paddle swats or late-night chores; it weaponizes psychological manipulation, social exclusion, and digital surveillance, often alongside illegal alcohol consumption and physical abuse.

At its core, hazing is any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, keeping membership, or gaining status in a group, where the behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits. This definition broadens the scope far beyond what many might traditionally consider hazing, recognizing that “I agreed to it” does not automatically make it safe or legal when there is inherent peer pressure and an undeniable power imbalance.

Main Categories of Hazing

Understanding the different facets of hazing is crucial for recognition and intervention. We categorize hazing into several key areas:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is the most prevalent and often most deadly form of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking of excessive amounts of alcohol, often rapidly. This includes “lineups” where pledges are compelled to drink multiple shots, “chugging challenges” designed to induce rapid intoxication, and dangerous “games” that require continuous consumption. There is also the pressure to consume unknown or mixed substances, which can lead to unpredictable and fatal reactions.
• Physical Hazing: This category includes direct physical abuse such as paddling and beatings. It also encompasses physically demanding activities far beyond normal conditioning expectations, like extreme calisthenics or “smokings,” forced runs, and intense workouts that are punitive rather than beneficial. Sleep deprivation, often coupled with food and water deprivation, can profoundly impact physical and mental health. Exposure to extreme cold or heat, or forcing students into dangerous environments, also falls under this category.
• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This deeply degrading form of hazing involves forced nudity or partial nudity, often in public or recorded settings. It includes simulated sexual acts, demeaning poses like “roasted pig,” or forcing individuals to wear degrading costumes. Hazing can also feature racial, sexist, or homophobic overtones, including the use of slurs, forced role-playing of stereotypes, or requiring minority members to perform racially degrading acts.
• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but profoundly damaging, psychological hazing involves verbal abuse, constant threats, and social isolation. It can include manipulation, forced confessions, and extreme forms of public shaming—whether in person or online. The goal is to break down an individual’s self-esteem and foster absolute obedience to the group.
• Digital/Online Hazing: This modern manifestation leverages technology to extend hazing far beyond physical gatherings. It includes group chat dares, challenges, and public humiliation orchestrated via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and Discord. There is often immense pressure to create or share compromising images or videos, or to engage in cyberstalking or harassment using location-sharing apps.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not confined to the stereotypical “Animal House” antics of fraternities. It pervades a surprising array of student organizations, often fueled by a potent mix of social status, tradition, and a code of silence.

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations. While national chapters officially ban hazing, it persists underground due to ingrained traditions and peer pressure.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: These organizations, often found at institutions like Texas A&M, have strong traditions and hierarchies that can unfortunately be conducive to hazing, sometimes disguised as “training” or “developing resilience.”
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs: At universities across Texas, groups like spirit organizations (e.g., Texas Cowboys at UT Austin) or other tradition-rich clubs can have new member initiation periods that cross the line into hazing, often involving forced activities or degrading tasks.
• Athletic Teams: Hazing is unfortunately common across all levels of university athletics, from football and basketball to cheerleading and club sports. It can manifest as forced nudity, excessive drinking, or physical abuse under the guise of “team bonding” or “toughening up.”
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous academic or performance-based organizations can fall prey to hazing, showcasing that the problem is deeply cultural, not limited to specific types of groups.
• Some Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: While less common, some chapters of these groups may develop hazing rituals, often through a desire to foster exclusivity or “test” commitment.

The ongoing presence of hazing across such a diverse range of organizations highlights that it is a systemic problem driven by issues of power, group dynamics, and a misguided sense of tradition rather than being confined to a specific type of student. For Burnet County families, understanding this broader context is key to protecting their children, no matter what group they choose to join.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas is crucial for any Burnet County family dealing with its aftermath. Both state and federal laws define hazing, outline its criminal penalties, and establish pathways for civil accountability.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has a comprehensive anti-hazing statute found in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This law is designed to deter hazing and hold individuals and organizations accountable.

Texas Education Code § 37.151, Definition of Hazing:
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.

In plain English, if someone makes a student engage in an act that is dangerous, harmful, or degrading—whether physically or mentally—to join or remain in a group, and the perpetrator either meant to do it or was reckless about the risk, that is hazing under Texas law. Critically, this can happen on or off campus (location does not matter), and it covers both mental and physical harm. The perpetrator’s intent doesn’t have to be malicious; “reckless” behavior (meaning they knew the risk and did it anyway) is sufficient. It is vital to understand that “consent” is not a defense; even if the victim agreed, it is still hazing if it meets this definition.

Texas Education Code § 37.152, Criminal Penalties:
Individual perpetrators of hazing can face severe criminal penalties in Texas:

• Class B Misdemeanor: This is the default classification for hazing that does not result in serious injury, carrying up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes an injury that requires medical treatment, the charge elevates to a Class A misdemeanor.
• State Jail Felony: If hazing results in serious bodily injury or death, the charge becomes a state jail felony, which carries a minimum of 180 days to two years in a state jail facility, plus a fine of up to $10,000.

Beyond direct participation, individuals who fail to report hazing can also face criminal charges. If you are a member or officer of an organization and you knew about hazing but failed to report it, you could be charged with a misdemeanor. Similarly, retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor offense.

Texas Education Code § 37.153, Organizational Liability:
Beyond individuals, entire organizations can be held criminally responsible for hazing:

• An organization (fraternity, sorority, club, team) can be criminally prosecuted if it authorized or encouraged the hazing.
• The organization can also be held liable if an officer or member acting in their official capacity knew about the hazing and failed to report it.

The penalties for organizations include a fine of up to $10,000 per violation. Furthermore, the university can revoke recognition of the organization and permanently ban it from campus, effectively ending its presence. This provision is vital because it ensures that both individuals personally and the groups they represent can face criminal accountability. Civil lawsuits can, and often do, pursue both individuals and the organizations simultaneously.

Texas Education Code § 37.154, Immunity for Good-Faith Reporting:
To encourage reporting, Texas law provides protections. A person who in good faith reports a hazing incident to a university official or law enforcement is immune from civil or criminal liability that might otherwise arise from their report. In critical medical emergencies, Texas law—along with many university policies—often provides amnesty for students who call 911 seeking medical aid, even if they were engaged in underage drinking or other minor offenses at the time. This is a crucial “Good Samaritan” law designed to prioritize life-saving intervention.

Texas Education Code § 37.155, Consent Not a Defense:
This is one of the most powerful aspects of Texas’s hazing law: it explicitly states that it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the hazing activity. This directly combats the common defense that “they agreed to it” by recognizing the inherent power imbalances and coercive environments that characterize hazing.

Texas Education Code § 37.156, Reporting by Educational Institutions:
Texas colleges and universities are also mandated to be proactive. They must:

• Provide hazing prevention education to all students.
• Publish clear hazing policies.
• Maintain and publicly release annual reports detailing all hazing violations and the corresponding disciplinary actions.

This reporting requirement creates a public record that families can access to determine if a particular organization has a history of violations, which can be invaluable in school disciplinary proceedings or civil legal actions. This transparency can help show a pattern of behavior and the university’s knowledge or inaction over time.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Understanding the Difference

Hazing can lead to both criminal charges and civil lawsuits, which serve different purposes and have distinct outcomes:

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated and pursued by the state (prosecutors), typically the District Attorney’s office in the county where the hazing occurred. The primary goal of a criminal case is to punish the perpetrator(s) through jail time, fines, or probation, and to serve as a deterrent. Hazing-related criminal charges can range from misdemeanor hazing offenses and furnishing alcohol to minors, to serious felony charges like assault, aggravated assault, or even manslaughter or negligent homicide in cases involving serious injury or death.
• Civil Cases: These are lawsuits filed directly by the victim—or by their surviving family members in cases of wrongful death—against individuals and organizations responsible for the harm. The main objective of a civil case is to obtain monetary compensation for the victim’s damages (medical bills, lost income, pain and suffering). Civil claims often center on negligence, which means a party failed to act with reasonable care, causing harm. This can include negligent supervision, gross negligence (reckless disregard for safety), premises liability (unsafe conditions), or intentional torts like assault and battery. Importantly, a criminal conviction is not required for a successful civil lawsuit; the burden of proof is lower in civil court (preponderance of the evidence) than in criminal court (beyond a reasonable doubt).

Both types of cases can proceed simultaneously, and each can inform the other, but they are separate legal processes with distinct aims.

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

Beyond state laws, federal regulations and recent legislative efforts also impact hazing accountability:

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This significant federal legislation mandates that colleges and universities receiving federal funds must enhance their hazing prevention and reporting. Starting around 2026, institutions will be required to:
  • Publicly disclose detailed information about hazing incidents on their campuses, increasing transparency.
  • Strengthen their hazing prevention policies and educational programs.
  • Maintain and make available specific data on hazing violations and disciplinary actions.
    This act aims to create a national standard for transparency and prevention, empowering students and families with information to make informed decisions.
• Title IX / Clery Act: These two federal laws can become relevant if hazing involves specific types of misconduct:
  • Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in education programs that receive federal funding. If hazing includes sexual harassment, sexual assault, or creates a sexually hostile environment, it can fall under Title IX, triggering a university’s obligation to investigate and respond.
  • The Clery Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. Hazing incidents involving assault, sexual assault, or alcohol/drug-related offenses could fall under Clery reporting requirements, providing another layer of institutional accountability and transparency.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

When hazing causes harm, multiple parties might share legal responsibility in a civil lawsuit:

• Individual Students: The students who directly planned, organized, or participated in the hazing activities. This includes those who supplied alcohol to minors, carried out physical abuse, orchestrated humiliation, or actively engaged in cover-up efforts.
• Local Chapter / Organization: The fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself. If the organization is a recognized legal entity, it can be directly sued. This also includes officers or new member educators who, acting in an official capacity, knew about the hazing and failed to prevent it or report it.
• National Fraternity / Sorority: The national headquarters of Greek organizations, which often set overarching policies, collect dues, provide guidance, and theoretically oversee local chapters. National organizations can be held liable if they failed to adequately supervise their local chapters, failed to enforce their own anti-hazing policies, or had knowledge of prior hazing incidents (either at that chapter or others) but failed to take effective preventative measures.
• University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself, along with its board of regents or trustees, may be sued. Liability can arise from:
  • Negligent supervision: Failing to properly oversee student organizations.
  • Failure to warn: Not informing students or parents about known dangers.
  • Deliberate indifference: Knowing about a pattern of hazing but failing to act to stop it.
  • Breach of contract: Failing to uphold promises made in student handbooks or codes of conduct.
  • For public universities in Texas (like UH, Texas A&M, UT), sovereign immunity can be a complex defense, but exceptions exist for gross negligence or Title IX violations. Private universities (like SMU, Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections.
• Third Parties: Other entities can sometimes be drawn into a lawsuit:
  • Landlords or property owners: If hazing occurred on their property and they had knowledge of dangerous activities but failed to intervene.
  • Bars or alcohol providers: Under dram shop laws, if they negligently served alcohol to visibly intoxicated individuals or minors, contributing to the hazing’s severity.
  • Security companies or event organizers: If they were hired to manage an event where hazing occurred but failed in their duty to ensure safety.

Each hazing case is fact-specific, and the potential defendants vary depending on the circumstances, making a thorough investigation by experienced attorneys essential.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The landscape of hazing litigation in Texas is significantly influenced by tragic national cases that have uncovered systemic failures, spurred legislative reform, and redefined institutional accountability. While these events happened outside of Texas, they establish legal precedents and patterns of foreseeability that deeply impact hazing cases in our home state, including those involving students from Burnet County. These are not isolated incidents but rather critical lessons that shape how we pursue justice for victims.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Forced alcohol consumption remains the leading cause of hazing-related deaths. These cases demonstrate how celebratory initiations can quickly turn fatal due to a culture of excess and a dangerous delay in seeking medical help.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died following a “bid acceptance” initiation event that involved extreme drinking. Footage from the fraternity house revealed that Piazza consumed a dangerous amount of alcohol, fell multiple times, and sustained severe traumatic brain injuries. Crucially, his “brothers” delayed calling for medical help for nearly 12 hours, a cover-up that intensified criminal and civil outrage. Dozens of fraternity members faced criminal charges, and Piazza’s death directly led to the enactment of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania, one of the strictest in the nation. This case is a stark example of how a culture of secrecy and delayed aid can compound tragedy and underscores the severe criminal and civil consequences faced by both individuals and organizations. For Texas families, this highlights that even though our state has strong laws, the human element of fear and cover-up can still be deadly.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, also 19, succumbed to acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume dangerously large quantities. Multiple fraternity members were prosecuted, mostly pleading guilty to misdemeanor hazing. Coffey’s death prompted FSU to temporarily suspend all Greek life and led to a wave of anti-hazing activism and legislative reform efforts in Florida. This case illustrates how a seemingly traditional “Big/Little” event can tragically morph into a deadly scenario due to forced consumption, demonstrating a repeating script that national fraternities are well aware of.
• Max Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Maxwell “Max” Gruver died with a blood-alcohol level of 0.495% (nearly six times the legal limit for driving) after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game. During this hazing ritual, pledges were forced to drink whenever they answered questions incorrectly. Max’s death led to multiple members facing criminal charges, with one convicted of negligent homicide. The tragedy inspired Louisiana to pass the Max Gruver Act, significantly strengthening its felony hazing statute. This case provides a powerful example of how hazing can cleverly disguise itself as harmless fun, while actually employing dangerous drinking games that have predictable, fatal outcomes.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire bottle of alcohol during a “Big/Little” night. Multiple fraternity members were convicted of hazing-related criminal charges. In 2023, Stone’s family reached a $10 million settlement with Pi Kappa Alpha national and BGSU, a clear testament to the multi-party accountability in severe hazing cases. This case highlights how universities, even public ones, can be held financially responsible for failing to adequately prevent and respond to hazing. The substantial financial settlement underscores the severe legal and financial repercussions that institutions and national organizations face when hazing leads to death.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physical and ritualistic hazing can lead to equally devastating outcomes, often involving direct violence, sleep deprivation, and exposure to dangerous conditions.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a pledge, died from a traumatic brain injury during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. He was blindfolded, weighted down with a heavy backpack, and repeatedly tackled during a ritual known as the “glass ceiling”—a clear example of physical hazing. Fraternity members waited an hour before calling 911, a delay that cost Michael his life. This was a landmark case: not only were multiple members convicted, but the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, the first time a national Greek organization faced such a charge. Pi Delta Psi was banned from operating in Pennsylvania for 10 years and faced substantial fines. For Burnet County families, this case is critical because it demonstrates that off-campus locations offer no immunity from legal accountability, and national organizations can be held directly responsible for the actions of their chapters.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not exclusive to Greek letter organizations; it is deeply embedded in the culture of many athletic programs, where “toughening up” can cross the line into abuse.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): Widespread allegations surfaced from former players detailing sexualized, racist, and physically abusive hazing within the prestigious Northwestern football program. Multiple players filed lawsuits against the university and coaching staff, asserting that the hazing was systemic and known to university officials. The scandal led to the firing of long-time head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed a wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university (which was later settled confidentially). This high-profile case is critically important for Texas families, as it highlights that hazing, even severe forms, is rampant beyond Greek life and can infect major athletic programs. It also underscores the institutional responsibility and the fact that universities, regardless of athletic prestige or program size, can be held accountable for failing to create a safe environment for their student-athletes.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies reveal disturbing common threads that are highly relevant to hazing cases in Texas:

• Predictable Patterns: Forced drinking, humiliation, physical violence, and dangerous rituals are recurring themes. When such incidents happen repeatedly across an organization’s chapters, it shows foreseeability—the national organization knew or should have known these dangers existed.
• Culture of Silence and Cover-Up: In nearly every major case, there was an attempt to delay medical aid, destroy evidence, or coerce witnesses into silence. This code of silence exacerbates harm and complicates investigations.
• Multi-Party Accountability: Hazing litigation often involves multiple defendants: individual students, local chapters, national organizations, and the universities themselves. This broad approach to accountability is crucial for achieving justice and covering the extensive damages incurred.
• Legislative Impact: Public outcry following these deaths has spurred significant legislative changes. While Texas has its own anti-hazing laws, the lessons from cases like Timothy Piazza and Max Gruver continue to inform advocacy for stronger protections and penalties nationwide.

For Burnet County families considering their options, these national precedents confirm that pursuing legal action is not just about financial compensation; it’s about forcing accountability, driving institutional change, and preventing future tragedies. The same dangerous scripts that led to these deaths elsewhere can and do play out at Texas universities.

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

For families in Burnet County, the reputation and safety protocols of Texas universities are paramount when choosing a school. Hazing incidents can tragically occur anywhere, but understanding the specific contexts at major Texas institutions is key. Our firm, Attorney911, operates from Houston and serves families throughout Central Texas, including Burnet County, and the broader region. We are familiar with the unique legal landscapes and cultural nuances of each of these prominent universities.

University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus, is home to a diverse student body and an active Greek life. For Burnet County families whose children attend UH, understanding its policies and history regarding hazing is critical.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Houston is a sprawling, diverse institution with a significant mix of residential and commuter students, located in the heart of Houston. Its student body reflects the city’s rich demographics, and student life includes a dynamic Greek system with chapters from various Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural organizations. The university also boasts numerous spirit organizations, athletic teams, and clubs, all of which contribute to the campus culture and carry potential hazing risks. Families from Burnet County may find the urban environment and diverse academic opportunities at UH appealing, making this context particularly relevant.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston maintains a clear, explicit anti-hazing policy. As reflected in recent versions of their student code of conduct, hazing is strictly prohibited, whether it occurs on-campus or off-campus. This prohibition extends to forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs; sleep deprivation; physical mistreatment; and any activity designed to cause mental distress as part of initiation or membership. UH provides multiple reporting channels through its Dean of Students office, Student Conduct offices, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). The university also posts its hazing statement and some disciplinary information on its website, generally outlining its zero-tolerance stance.

5.1.3 Example Incidents & Responses

While UH’s public reporting isn’t as detailed as some institutions, disciplinary actions against organizations for hazing have occurred. For example, a Pi Kappa Alpha incident around 2016 involved pledges allegedly being deprived of sufficient food, water, and sleep during a multi-day event. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being slammed onto a table or similar surface. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and university suspension, highlighting the severe physical risks involved even when the hazing isn’t fatal. Later disciplinary references have included fraternities sanctioned for behavior “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” involving significant alcohol misuse and various policy violations, leading to suspensions and probation. These incidents, though some details often remain internal to the university, demonstrate that hazing violations are an ongoing concern at UH.

5.1.3 The Leonel Bermudez Case (Attorney911 Lead Case)

Attorney911 is currently representing Leonel Bermudez in a $10 million lawsuit against the University of Houston, its Board of Regents, the Pi Kappa Phi national headquarters, its housing corporation, and 13 individual fraternity members. This lawsuit, filed in late 2025, alleges severe hazing that took place at the Pi Kappa Phi Beta Nu chapter at UH. Bermudez, a transfer student, was forced to undergo horrific rituals, including:

• Wearing a “pledge fanny pack” with degrading contents like condoms and a sex toy 24/7.
• Being sprayed with a hose “like waterboarding” and threatened with actual waterboarding.
• Forced participation in grueling physical workouts at Yellowstone Boulevard Park, including over 100 push-ups and 500 squats that left him unable to stand.
• Forced consumption of milk, hot dogs, and peppercorns until vomiting, followed by immediate sprints.
• Witnessing another pledge hog-tied and an object placed in his mouth for over an hour.

These rituals led to Bermudez developing rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown) and acute kidney failure, causing his urine to turn brown. He was hospitalized for four days and faces ongoing risks of permanent kidney damage. The Pi Kappa Phi chapter was suspended on November 6, 2025, and voted to surrender its charter on November 14, 2025. This case highlights the brutal reality of modern hazing and our firm’s deep involvement in pursuing justice for its victims. As Ralph Manginello stated, “His urine was brown. My client’s urine was brown. That’s how close he was to dying… We’re almost in 2026. This has to stop.” Lupe Peña added, “If this prevents harm to another person…Let’s bring this to light. Enough is enough.” For more details on this active case, see coverage from 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 involving the University of Houston, especially those affecting students from relatively close-by areas like Burnet County, often involve multiple legal jurisdictions and entities. Investigations may include the UHPD, the Houston Police Department (if the incident occurred off-campus within city limits), and the Harris County District Attorney’s Office for criminal charges. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in Harris County, one of the busiest and most populous counties in Texas. Potential defendants could include individual students, the local chapter itself, the national fraternity or sorority headquartered elsewhere, the University of Houston, its Board of Regents, and potentially landlords or property owners where the hazing took place. Due to the university’s public status, pursuing claims can involve navigating aspects of sovereign immunity, though exceptions for gross negligence or Title IX violations may apply.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For students from Burnet County or other parts of Texas attending the University of Houston, proactive measures and timely action are crucial:

• Understand UH’s Policies: Familiarize yourself with the UH anti-hazing policy and know your rights as a student.
• Utilize Reporting Channels: If you experience or witness hazing, report it to the UH Dean of Students office, Student Conduct office, or UHPD. Anonymous reporting options may also be available.
• Document Everything: As soon as possible, capture screenshots of any texts, group chats, or social media posts related to hazing. Photograph any injuries, property damage, or locations. Keep detailed notes (dates, times, names, what happened). This is especially critical since incidents may involve off-campus locations.
• Prioritize Medical Care: If injuries occur, seek medical attention immediately. Ensure that the medical staff are informed that the injuries are related to hazing for proper documentation.
• Consult Legal Counsel Early: Contact an attorney experienced in Houston-based hazing cases, such as Attorney911, as soon as possible. Our firm understands the local legal landscape and can help preserve evidence, navigate university processes, and protect your child’s legal rights. Early consultation can often mean the difference between holding perpetrators accountable and struggling against a united institutional defense.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University in College Station holds a unique place in the hearts of many Texans, including families from Burnet County, known for its deep-rooted traditions and the iconic Corps of Cadets. However, even revered traditions can sometimes foster environments where hazing takes root.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M University is not just a university; it’s an institution synonymous with tradition, loyalty, and a strong sense of community. Its sprawling campus in College Station is home to a massive student body, including many students from Burnet County and other Central Texas communities. The Corps of Cadets, a deeply tradition-bound military-style organization, is central to A&M’s identity, alongside a robust Greek life and countess other student organizations. This environment, while fostering strong bonds, also presents unique challenges for hazing prevention due to its emphasis on hierarchy, ritual, and a “way of life.”

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M’s anti-hazing policy is stringent, explicitly prohibiting hazing by any student organization, team, or group. Their policy defines hazing broadly to include any intentional, knowing, or reckless act directed against a student that endangers mental or physical health for the purpose of initiation or membership. A&M provides several avenues for reporting, including the Division of Student Affairs, the Hazing Reporting Form, the University Police Department (UPD), and various confidential resources. Given the university’s deep-seeded traditions, A&M often emphasizes educational initiatives and clear consequences for hazing violations.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Hazing incidents at Texas A&M have drawn significant attention, especially due to the involvement of high-profile Greek organizations and the Corps of Cadets:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Chemical Burns Case (around 2021): This particularly egregious incident involved allegations that pledges of the SAE chapter at A&M were subjected to intense physical hazing, including being forced into strenuous activity while substances like industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit were poured on them. This resulted in severe chemical burns requiring emergency medical attention and skin graft surgeries. The fraternity was suspended by the university, and the affected pledges pursuing a $1 million lawsuit against the chapter. This case underscores the extreme physical dangers and lasting injuries that can result from hazing and the willingness of victims to seek justice when universities sometimes attempt to minimize incidents.
• Corps of Cadets Hazing Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging degrading and abusive hazing within the Corps of Cadets. The allegations included forced participation in sexually suggestive acts and being bound in a “roasted pig” pose (a deeply humiliating act often disguised as tradition or character-building). Although Texas A&M stated it addressed the matter through its internal disciplinary processes, the lawsuit sought over $1 million, drawing a stark contrast between internal university mechanisms and the pursuit of justice through the civil court system.
• Texas A&M Aggie Bonfire Collapse (1999): While not traditional “hazing” in a Greek life sense, the tragic collapse of the Aggie Bonfire, which killed 12 and injured 27, highlighted the extreme risks associated with student-led, tradition-laden activities and the institutional responsibility of the university. Multiple lawsuits against university officials resulted in settlements exceeding $6 million, leading to the official cessation of the Bonfire tradition on campus. This case, though unique, provided a powerful lesson in the university’s liability for high-risk student activities.

These incidents demonstrate A&M’s ongoing challenges with hazing, despite policies designed to prevent it, and the potential for severe harm in both Greek life and highly traditional organizations like the Corps.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

A hazing case originating from Texas A&M in College Station, a popular choice for many Burnet County families, would typically involve the Brazos County court system. Criminal investigations could be conducted by the Texas A&M Police Department (AMPD) or the College Station Police Department. Civil actions would be filed in Brazos County district courts. Potential defendants in such a lawsuit are broad and can include individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority headquartered elsewhere, and crucially, Texas A&M University itself (as a public institution, questions of sovereign immunity would need to be addressed, with exceptions often focusing on gross negligence or Title IX violations). Given Texas A&M’s substantial resources, hazing cases against the university and its associated organizations are fiercely litigated, highlighting the need for highly experienced legal representation.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For students from Burnet County and their families, navigating a hazing situation at Texas A&M requires diligence and informed action:

• Understand AMPD Protocols: Be aware of how to report to AMPD, along with the A&M Office of Student Conduct.
• Document Early, Document Often: Given the emphasis on tradition and loyalty at A&M, evidence can be tightly controlled or quickly destroyed. Students should immediately screenshot group chats, photograph injuries, and save any physical evidence related to hazing activities.
• Prioritize Medical Care: Do not delay seeking medical attention for any hazing-related injuries. Ensure medical providers are aware the injuries are linked to hazing.
• Seek Legal Counsel with Experience Against Large Institutions: Consult an attorney experienced in hazing and institutional litigation in Texas. Attorney911 has direct experience handling cases against large public institutions and can help families from Burnet County or elsewhere in Texas navigate the complexities of an A&M hazing case, including sovereign immunity challenges and the aggressive defense strategies employed by such universities.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is a flagship institution for many students from Burnet County, known for its academic rigor, vibrant campus life, and passionate school spirit. Despite its prestigious reputation, UT Austin has its own challenges with hazing, as evidenced by its public reporting.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin, in the state capital, is one of the largest and most prestigious universities in Texas, attracting students from Burnet County and across the nation. Its campus culture is a blend of academic excellence, a fierce sense of identity (“Hook ’em Horns”), and a dynamic social scene heavily influenced by a large and active Greek life, numerous spirit organizations, and competitive athletic programs. Like many large universities, UT’s size and diverse student body present complex challenges for overseeing student conduct and eradicating deeply ingrained traditions that can cross into hazing.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas at Austin maintains a “zero-tolerance” policy regarding hazing. Their official policy explicitly prohibits any conduct that falls under the Texas Education Code definition of hazing. What sets UT apart from many universities is its commitment to transparency through a publicly accessible Hazing Violations page on its website. This page lists specific organizations, the dates of their violations, a summary of the hazing conduct, and the disciplinary actions taken by the university. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students office, the Title IX Office, the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD), and an anonymous online reporting form.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public Hazing Violations page provides a candid, albeit often stark, look at hazing incidents on campus. This transparency is a valuable resource, even if the repeated violations are concerning:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): The Pi Kappa Alpha chapter was sanctioned after new members were allegedly directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, activities found to constitute hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education. This shows that even seemingly minor hazing can result in formal disciplinary action.
• Texas Cowboys (2018): This long-standing spirit organization, known for its strong traditions, was sanctioned following multiple allegations of hazing related to its “new man” process. The hazing involved forced physical activity, sleep deprivation, and alcohol misuse. The organization was suspended, and its alumni leadership underwent significant restructuring. This incident reinforces that hazing is not limited to Greek life but can be ingrained in any powerful, tradition-bound student group, including those with alumni support.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (2006): UT Austin has documented instances involving SAE, an organization with a national history of hazing concerns. A 2006 case involved a death linked to alcohol consumption during hazing, listed in the broader hazing database. Even while some organizations attempt to reform, past incidents often highlight persistent challenges.

The fact that UT actively publishes these incidents, while commendable for transparency, also illustrates the persistent nature of hazing on campus, making it a continuous concern for students and parents, including those from Burnet County contemplating sending their children to UT.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

A hazing case at the University of Texas at Austin, a destination for many Burnet County students, would likely involve the Travis County legal system. Criminal charges would be handled by UTPD or the Austin Police Department, and prosecuted by the Travis County District Attorney. Civil lawsuits would be filed in Travis County district courts. As a public institution, UT Austin may invoke sovereign immunity, but our firm has experience navigating these defenses, especially when allegations involve gross negligence, deliberate indifference, or violations of federal statutes like Title IX. The university’s detailed public hazing log can be a crucial tool in civil litigation, providing documented evidence of an organization’s history, the university’s knowledge of prior misconduct, and any patterns of ineffective enforcement.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

For Burnet County families connected to UT Austin, an informed approach to hazing situations is vital:

• Review UT’s Hazing Violations Page: Before joining any organization, review UT’s public record of hazing incidents (easily found via a search for “UT Austin Hazing Violations”). This offers invaluable insight into an organization’s history.
• Utilize UT’s Reporting System: Report any hazing concerns to the Dean of Students, UTPD, or anonymously through their online portal.
• Document Relentlessly: Collect screenshots of communications, photos of injuries or activities, and detailed notes on all hazing incidents. Given the rapid flow of information on campus, swift documentation is key.
• Protect Your Rights with Legal Consultation: Contact a Texas hazing attorney immediately. Attorney911 can help interpret UT’s public records, advise on the best reporting strategy, and ensure all legal avenues for accountability are explored, protecting your child’s well-being and future.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, a private university in Dallas, is another significant institution for students from Burnet County and affluent communities across Texas. With its strong reputation and active Greek scene, understanding SMU’s approach to hazing is essential.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Southern Methodist University is a distinguished private university located in Dallas. It is renowned for its beautiful campus, rigorous academics, and a vibrant social scene often characterized by its prominent Greek life. Many families from Burnet County, seeking a private university experience, consider SMU. The university attracts a student body that often values social connections and traditional campus organizations, including a large percentage of students involved in fraternities and sororities. This strong Greek presence, combined with a desire to maintain institutional reputation, shapes SMU’s approach to student conduct, including hazing incidents.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU maintains a strict anti-hazing policy explicitly outlawing any activity that fits the Texas Education Code definition of hazing. As a private institution, SMU can often enforce its rules with a somewhat different timeline and less public transparency than public universities like UT or A&M. However, it still offers multiple reporting channels, including the Dean of Students office, the Department of Student Conduct and Community Standards, and SMU Police. SMU also utilizes tools like “Real Response,” a digital platform for anonymous reporting, reflecting modern efforts to capture hazing concerns.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Like many universities with active Greek systems, SMU has faced hazing challenges:

• Kappa Alpha Order Incident (2017): The Kappa Alpha Order chapter at SMU faced significant disciplinary action following allegations that new members were subjected to paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and sleep deprivation. The university swiftly suspended the chapter, imposing severe restrictions that included a ban on recruiting until approximately 2021. This incident highlights SMU’s capacity for strong institutional response when hazing activities come to light, particularly when they involve physical abuse and alcohol.
• SMU Hazing Statement: While less publicly detailed than UT’s specific hazing log, SMU’s policies and communications consistently reinforce a commitment to preventing hazing. However, the private nature of the institution means that specific incidents and their resolutions are often communicated internally or within the Greek community, with less general public disclosure compared to public universities. This can make it more challenging for families from Burnet County to research an organization’s full history without diligent investigation once an incident occurs.

These documented cases are a reminder that hazing is a persistent issue even at private universities with deeply ingrained social traditions.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases arising from SMU, an attractive option for students from Burnet County, would typically be handled within the Dallas County legal system. Criminal charges, if any, would be investigated by SMU Police or the Dallas Police Department and prosecuted by the Dallas County District Attorney. Civil lawsuits would be filed in Dallas County district courts. As a private institution, SMU primarily faces civil liability based on negligence principles rather than sovereign immunity, which often applies to public universities. This means victims may have more direct avenues to hold the university itself accountable for negligent supervision or failure to protect students. Discovery in such cases would seek to uncover internal SMU records detailing past hazing complaints, investigations, and communications between the university and the involved organizations, which might not be publicly disclosed.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For Burnet County families involved with SMU, particular attention to reporting and legal strategy is beneficial:

• Understand Private University Dynamics: Be aware that SMU’s internal disciplinary processes may be less transparent than public universities. This makes private documentation and legal counsel even more critical.
• Utilize All Reporting Options: Use SMU’s official reporting channels, including their anonymous options like Real Response, to ensure incidents are on record with the university.
• Immediate & Thorough Documentation: Due to potentially limited public information, students and parents must meticulously document every detail, text, photo, and witness account of hazing. This evidence forms the backbone of any legal claim.
• Seek Experienced Counsel with Private University Experience: Contact Attorney911 for a consultation. Our firm has experience litigating against private institutions, understanding their legal defenses and how to compel critical evidence through the discovery process to hold them accountable.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University in Waco is a prominent private Christian university highly regarded by many families, including those from Burnet County, for its academic programs and faith-based community. Its unique institutional identity shapes its approach to student conduct and hazing.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University is a private Baptist university located in Waco, Texas. It attracts a significant number of students from Burnet County who are drawn to its strong academic programs, vibrant Christian community, and traditional values. Baylor’s campus culture emphasizes community, service, and spiritual development, alongside competitive athletic programs and a growing Greek system. This unique blend of faith-based identity and traditional university life means that allegations of hazing can often trigger complex responses, balancing a commitment to student well-being with principles of restorative justice and institutional reputation.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University maintains a strict anti-hazing policy that aligns with Texas state law, explicitly prohibiting any hazing activity. The university states a “zero-tolerance” policy for hazing and strongly emphasizes student safety and ethical conduct. Reporting channels include the Department of Student Conduct Administration, the Baylor Police Department (BPD), and anonymous reporting options. Given Baylor’s Christian mission, their response to misconduct often involves educational and developmental components alongside disciplinary measures, but the legal obligations to prevent and punish hazing remain non-negotiable.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor University has, like other institutions, faced hazing allegations, some of which have involved its athletic programs:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): This incident gained considerable attention when an investigation into hazing within the Baylor baseball program led to the suspension of 14 players. The exact details of the hazing were not fully disclosed publicly, but the university confirmed serious policy violations occurred. The suspensions were staggered, impacting the early part of the baseball season. This case is crucial because it highlights that hazing at Baylor, as with other universities, is not confined to Greek life but can affect competitive athletic teams, demonstrating that a commitment to campus values sometimes clashes with the realities of student conduct.
• Broader Institutional Scrutiny: Baylor has previously faced intense national scrutiny related to its handling of sexual assault cases (involving the football program and Title IX violations). While hazing is distinct, this history of external pressure and demands for accountability impacts how the university responds to all forms of student misconduct, creating an environment where a thorough response to hazing is both legally mandated and institutionally critical.

These incidents demonstrate that even in institutions with strong moral and ethical foundations, hazing can occur, requiring vigilant oversight and robust enforcement.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases at Baylor University, a private institution chosen by many Burnet County families, would typically fall under the jurisdiction of McLennan County courts. Criminal investigations could be conducted by Baylor Police or the Waco Police Department, with prosecution by the McLennan County District Attorney. Civil lawsuits against Baylor University would be filed in McLennan County district courts. As a private university, Baylor generally does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it a more direct target for negligence-based lawsuits concerning hazing. Legal proceedings would focus on whether Baylor exercised reasonable care in supervising student organizations, responding to prior complaints, or enforcing its anti-hazing policies, similar to any private entity. The discovery process would be key to obtaining internal university communications, investigative reports, and other documents that inform the university’s knowledge and actions regarding hazing.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

For Burnet County families with ties to Baylor University, addressing hazing requires a balance of understanding university values and asserting legal rights:

• Engage with Baylor’s Conduct Office: Work with Baylor’s Department of Student Conduct Administration for official reporting and to trigger internal university investigations.
• Document Thouroughly: Collect and preserve all available evidence—digital communications, photos, medical records, and detailed personal accounts. This evidence is critical for both university investigations and any future legal action.
• Prioritize Medical Care: Do not hesitate to seek medical attention for injuries, ensuring that the connection to hazing is clearly documented in medical records.
• Seek Legal Representation from Experienced Counsel: Contact Attorney911 for a confidential consultation. Our firm understands the unique characteristics of private universities like Baylor and can provide tailored legal strategies to ensure that students’ rights are protected, and that appropriate accountability is sought, balancing the desire for justice with sensitivity to the family’s and institution’s values.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

Understanding the role of national fraternity and sorority organizations (and their historical context) is paramount in hazing litigation, both at specific campuses in Texas and across the country. For Burnet County families, it’s not enough to know about local chapters; the patterns established by national organizations provide crucial evidence for legal action.

Why National Histories Matter

The vast majority of fraternities and sororities active at universities like UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor are chapters of national organizations. These national entities typically:

• Establish policies: They create extensive anti-hazing manuals, risk management guidelines, and codes of conduct for all their chapters.
• Collect dues and fees: They receive financial contributions from every member, which can include funds for “risk management” and insurance.
• Provide oversight and training: They often send advisors to local chapters, conduct leadership training, and maintain a relationship with the university.

These national anti-hazing manuals and policies exist for a reason: many national organizations have faced multiple hazing incidents, catastrophic injuries, and wrongful deaths in the past. They know the dangerous patterns—forced drinking nights, grueling physical challenges, degrading rituals, and the pervasive code of silence that protects perpetrators.

When a local Texas chapter repeats these same hazing scripts that have already led to injuries, expulsions, or deaths at other chapters in other states, it provides critical evidence of foreseeability. The national organization, having seen similar incidents before, can be argued to have had prior knowledge of the risks and therefore a duty to take stronger, more effective preventative action. This directly impacts legal strategy to hold national entities accountable.

Organization Mapping in Texas: National Reach

Here, we will synthesize information on Greek organizations in Texas that have national affiliations, particularly those that have faced documented hazing issues nationally. While we cannot list every single chapter at every Texas university, we can discuss the broader organizational context. Attorney911 tracks these organizations, knowing their histories provides critical leverage in demanding accountability. For current and detailed records of these organizations, refer to the directories at the end of this guide.

At Texas universities, students will encounter chapters of organizations with significant national footprints. For illustrative purposes, we focus on several prominent examples with known national hazing histories:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike): Present at major Texas universities, Pike has a national record marred by severe hazing incidents. For example, the 2021 death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University (Ohio) from alcohol poisoning during a “Big/Little” night led to criminal convictions of members and a $10 million settlement with the national fraternity and university. Such incidents demonstrate a pattern that implies national foreseeability.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): SAE has a substantial presence across Texas campuses and a national history so troubled that Bloomberg News has called it “America’s deadliest fraternity.” National concerns persist, including a traumatic brain injury lawsuit (2023) filed against SAE at the University of Alabama alleging severe hazing. Locally, the Texas A&M SAE chapter (around 2021) faced a $1 million lawsuit after pledges suffered severe chemical burns from industrial-strength cleaner poured on them during hazing rituals. At the University of Texas at Austin (January 2024), an exchange student alleged assault and sustained severe injuries (dislocated leg, fractured tibia) at an SAE party, with the chapter already under suspension for prior violations. These cases demonstrate a recurring pattern of risk.
• Phi Delta Theta (Phi Delt): Actively represented at Texan institutions, Phi Delta Theta’s national history includes the tragic 2017 death of Max Gruver at Louisiana State University due to alcohol poisoning during a hazing “Bible study” game. This led to criminal prosecution and Louisiana’s “Max Gruver Act,” signaling serious national issues.
• Pi Kappa Phi (Pi Kapp): With chapters at several Texas schools, Pi Kappa Phi’s national organization, as Attorney911 is currently litigating, has faced serious allegations. The Leonel Bermudez case (2025) at the University of Houston, handled by Attorney911, details severe physical and psychological hazing resulting in acute kidney failure. Nationally, the 2017 death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University also stemmed from alcohol-fueled hazing during “Big Brother Night.” These incidents confirm a disturbing pattern of systemic hazing within the fraternity’s chapters including local ones.
• Kappa Alpha Order (KA): With deep roots in the South and chapters throughout Texas, Kappa Alpha Order has had campus-specific hazing controversies. For instance, the SMU chapter (2017) was suspended for allegations of paddling, forced drinking, and sleep deprivation, demonstrating local manifestations of national organization concerns.
• Kappa Sigma (KΣ): A national fraternity with Texas chapters, Kappa Sigma gained national attention for the 2001 drowning death of Chad Meredith at the University of Miami, leading to a $12.6 million jury verdict against the fraternity and the “Chad Meredith Law” in Florida. More recently, allegations of hazing at Texas A&M (2023) resulted in pledges suffering rhabdomyolysis from extreme physical abuse, highlighting ongoing issues.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

For Burnet County families seeking justice, understanding these national and local patterns is not merely an academic exercise—it is central to building a winning legal strategy. Here’s how:

• Foreseeability: When a national organization has experienced multiple hazing deaths or severe injuries across its chapters due to specific types of hazing (e.g., forced alcohol, extreme physical tests), it becomes increasingly difficult for them to argue that a similar incident at a Texas chapter was “unforeseeable.” Our legal team can argue that the national organization had a duty to implement more robust prevention and enforcement measures given these recurring patterns.
• Negligent Supervision: It can be argued that national fraternities and sororities, despite their written policies, have been negligent in their supervision of local chapters. This negligence might be demonstrated by a history of ineffective discipline, a failure to follow up on red flags, or allowing “paper policies” to mask a culture of continued hazing.
• Institutional Knowledge: Courts often look at what the national organization knew or should have known through its vast network of chapters, risk management reports, and internal communications. Where there is a documented pattern of similar hazing incidents, a judge or jury may infer that the national knew or should have known a particular type of hazing would occur.
• Settlement Leverage: When facing a lawsuit, national organizations and their insurers evaluate their exposure based on a historical record of similar cases. A strong history of hazing incidents at other chapters can significantly increase a plaintiff’s leverage in settlement negotiations, potentially leading to more favorable outcomes.
• Insurance Coverage: Insurers for national organizations and universities may initially try to deny coverage for “intentional acts” like hazing. However, experienced hazing attorneys can argue that the national organization’s negligent supervision in failing to prevent hazing is distinct from the intentional acts of individual students and should be covered.

By meticulously linking local incidents in Texas to the broader, documented hazing histories of national organizations, Attorney911 can build a powerful case demonstrating a pattern of institutional negligence and demanding true accountability for victims.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Successfully litigating a hazing case in Texas – whether from Burnet County or further afield – requires meticulous attention to detail, a deep understanding of the law, and the strategic deployment of evidence. Unlike typical personal injury claims, hazing cases involve complex layers of group dynamics, institutional culpability, and often a concerted effort to conceal the truth.

Evidence: The Cornerstones of a Hazing Case

In hazing litigation, evidence is often elusive. The “code of silence” is strong, and digital evidence can disappear quickly. Our firm prioritizes swift and strategic evidence collection to overcome these challenges.

• Digital Communications: This is often the single most critical category of evidence in modern hazing cases. Group chats on platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, and even private fraternity/sorority apps frequently contain explicit instructions, threats, derogatory comments, photos, and videos related to hazing. These communications reveal the planning, intent, specific hazing acts, and who was involved. Direct messages (DMs) on social media platforms also provide invaluable insights. Our team understands how to work with digital forensic experts to recover deleted messages and can initiate orders to preserve this vital data.
• Photos & Videos: In today’s highly digital world, hazing events are often documented, ironically, by the perpetrators themselves. This can include:
  • Content filmed by members or pledges showing hazing in progress, forced activities, or humiliating acts.
  • Footage shared in private group chats, Snapchat stories, Instagram DMs, or even temporarily posted on public social media.
  • Even security camera footage from houses or off-campus venues can capture people entering/exiting, potential coercion, or events leading up to an incident.
• Internal Organization Documents: Once a lawsuit is filed, we can legally compel the production of documents that shed light on a chapter’s inner workings and the national organization’s oversight. This includes:
  • Pledge manuals, new member education plans, and initiation scripts.
  • Emails, texts, or memos from officers giving instructions during the new member period.
  • Risk management policies, disciplinary records, and communications between local chapters, alumni advisors, and national headquarters.
• University Records: Through discovery in a lawsuit or public information requests at state universities (like UH, Texas A&M, UT), we can obtain critical institutional records:
  • Prior conduct files related to the specific organization or individuals involved, showing patterns of hazing, probation, or suspensions.
  • Incident reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices.
  • Clery Act reports and similar disclosures that reveal patterns of misconduct.
  • Internal emails and memos among administrators discussing the organization or hazing concerns.
• Medical and Psychological Records: These records are objective proof of the harm suffered. They include:
  • Emergency room and hospitalization reports, detailing injuries, treatment, and immediate post-incident condition.
  • Medical imaging results (X-rays, CT scans, MRIs).
  • Toxicology reports (blood alcohol levels, drug tests) crucial in alcohol/substance hazing.
  • Evaluations from neurologists (for brain injuries), endocrinologists (for kidney damage like in the Bermudez case), and other specialists.
  • Psychological evaluations and therapy notes documenting trauma, PTSD, depression, and anxiety.
• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are indispensable. This includes:
  • Testimony from other pledges or new members who endured similar hazing.
  • Members who witnessed the hazing or were coerced into participating.
  • Roommates, friends, Resident Advisors (RAs), coaches, or other university staff who observed changes in behavior or were told about incidents.
  • Former members who left the organization due to hazing practices.

Damages: Compensating for the Full Scope of Harm

Hazing inflicts deep, multifaceted harm, and Texas law provides avenues for victims and their families to recover comprehensive damages. Our firm works with a network of experts to thoroughly evaluate every aspect of a client’s losses.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This covers all costs associated with physical and mental health treatment.
  • Past medical expenses: Emergency room visits, ambulance transport, hospital stays (including ICU and surgery), medications, and medical equipment.
  • Future medical and therapeutic needs: Ongoing physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy (for brain injury victims), psychiatric care and medications for PTSD, depression, anxiety, and future surgeries. For catastrophic injuries, a life care plan is developed by specialists to project lifetime care costs, covering 24/7 care, assisted living, and adaptive equipment, similar to what might be needed in a case like Danny Santulli’s.
• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: Hazing can derail a student’s academic and professional future.
  • Lost wages: Income lost by the victim or by parents who must take time off work to provide care.
  • Lost educational opportunities: Tuition and fees for missed semesters, lost academic or athletic scholarships, delayed graduation, and the potential for a lowered lifetime earning trajectory.
  • Diminished future earning capacity: For victims with permanent physical or psychological disabilities, expert economists calculate the long-term loss of income and career potential.
• Non-Economic Damages: These compensate for subjective but profound forms of suffering.
  • Physical pain and suffering: This includes the immediate pain from injuries, as well as chronic pain or discomfort from permanent conditions.
  • Emotional distress and psychological harm: This encompasses diagnosed conditions like PTSD, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, panic attacks, and fear. It also includes the intangible losses of humiliation, shame, loss of dignity, and the profound erosion of trust.
  • Loss of enjoyment of life: This refers to the inability to engage in usual activities such as sports or hobbies, general withdrawal from social life, and the loss of the expected college experience.
• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): In the most tragic cases, hazing results in death. Texas law allows specific family members (spouse, children, parents; sometimes siblings) to recover:
  • Funeral and burial expenses.
  • Loss of financial support the deceased would have provided to their family.
  • Loss of companionship, love, and society experienced by surviving family members.
  • Grief and emotional suffering endured by parents, siblings, and spouses.
  • Mental health support for family members dealing with the traumatic loss.
• Punitive Damages: These are awarded not to compensate the victim, but to punish defendants for exceptionally reckless, malicious, or grossly negligent conduct and to deter similar behavior in the future. In Texas, punitive damages are available, but their availability and amount can be subject to statutory caps in certain cases. They are often sought when defendants ignored prior warnings, engaged in particularly cruel hazing, attempted cover-ups, or acted with callous indifference to known risks.

Strategy: Unraveling the Layers of Responsibility

Hazing cases are rarely straightforward. Winning against well-funded institutions and national organizations requires sophisticated legal strategy:

• Identifying All Responsible Parties: A thorough investigation is needed to identify not only the individual perpetrators but also the local chapter, the national organization, the university, and potentially any third parties (like property owners or alcohol providers) who bear responsibility.
• Navigating Insurance Coverage: National fraternities, local chapters, and universities all carry different types of insurance (general liability, directors and officers, umbrella policies). Insurers often try to deny coverage, claiming hazing is an “intentional act” exclusion. Our firm, with Lupe Peña’s background in insurance defense, knows how to challenge these denials, force insurers to defend, and uncover all available coverage to ensure compensation.
• Overcoming Institutional Defenses: Universities and national organizations employ experienced defense attorneys who will assert various defenses (e.g., “it was off-campus,” “it was not hazing,” “the student consented,” “we have anti-hazing policies”). Our strategy involves meticulously building a case that disarms these defenses by demonstrating foreseeability, negligent supervision, and a pattern of inaction.
• Balancing Case Goals: Families often seek more than just monetary compensation; they want accountability and change. Our firm works to achieve a resolution that can include financial settlement, but also institutional reforms, public apologies, and the implementation of stronger anti-hazing measures.
• Evidence Preservation: The critical importance of evidence can’t be overstated. We advise families from Burnet County and across Texas to immediately collect all relevant digital communications, medical records, and witness information. Attorney911’s video on using your phone to document evidence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) explains best practices for preserving screenshots and photos, as time is of the essence before evidence disappears or is destroyed.

Building a hazing case is a long and challenging process, but with experienced and strategic legal counsel, justice and meaningful accountability are achievable.

Practical Guides & FAQs

When hazing impacts your family in Burnet County or anywhere in Texas, knowing what steps to take, what mistakes to avoid, and where to find reliable answers can make all the difference. This section offers immediate actionable advice for parents, students, and witnesses.

For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

As a parent, your intuition is powerful. Trust it if you suspect hazing.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be vigilant for any of these red flags that your child might be experiencing hazing:
  • Unexplained injuries (bruises, burns, cuts) or repeated “accidents” with inconsistent explanations.
  • Sudden, extreme exhaustion or profound sleep deprivation.
  • Drastic changes in mood, increased anxiety, irritability, withdrawal from normal activities, or signs of depression.
  • Obsessive or secretive phone use (especially for group chats), often coupled with anxiety about missing “mandatory” events or instructions.
  • Sudden secrecy about organization activities or defensiveness when asked about the group.
  • Unexpected requests for money without clear explanation, or large expenses for the organization.
  • Declining grades or missed classes due to “mandatory” commitments.
• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not accusation. Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with your group?” or “Is there anything that made you uncomfortable?” Emphasize that their safety and well-being are your top priorities, far above membership in any organization. Assure them you will support them without judgment if they disclose hazing.
• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize medical care immediately. Take photos of all injuries from multiple angles and at different stages of healing. Document everything your child tells you, including names, dates, times, and locations of incidents. Save any relevant physical items or digital materials.
• Dealing with the University: Document every single communication you have with university administrators. Ask specific questions about prior incidents involving the same organization and what the school did in response. Do not sign anything without legal review.
• 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 the incident, delaying, or trying to silence you, it is time to contact an attorney experienced in Texas hazing law.

For Students / Pledges: Self-Assessment & Safety Planning

If you’re a student from Burnet County pledging a group, sometimes it’s hard to tell where the line is between “tradition” and “hazing.”

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Ask yourself:
  • Am I being forced or pressured to do something I don’t want to do?
  • Would I do this activity if I had a genuine choice, free from fear of social exclusion or other negative consequences?
  • Is this activity dangerous (physically or mentally), degrading, or illegal?
  • Would I feel comfortable doing this if my parents, a dean, or the public were watching?
  • Are older members making new members do things they don’t have to do themselves?
  • Am I being told to keep secrets, lie, or hide these activities from outsiders?
    If you answered yes to any of these questions, it’s likely hazing.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that “consent is not a defense” to hazing. The law recognizes that in environments with power imbalances, peer pressure, and fear of exclusion, true “voluntary consent” is often impossible. You have the right to be safe, regardless of what you may have felt pressured to “agree” to.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the legal right to leave any organization at any time. If you feel unsafe or wish to quit, inform someone outside the organization first (a trusted friend, family member, RA, or campus official). You can send an email or text stating your resignation. If you fear retaliation, report this concern to the Dean of Students or campus police; they can implement no-contact orders. Many schools and Texas law have good-faith reporter protections, meaning you will not get in trouble for calling 911 in a medical emergency.
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Texas law and many university policies encourage calling for help in emergencies by offering protections. If someone seeks aid for an intoxicated or injured individual, they may receive amnesty from minor conduct violations (like underage drinking).

For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were a member of an organization where hazing occurred, or witnessed it, you might feel conflicted or fearful.

• Your Role in Accountability: Your testimony and any evidence you possess can be vital in preventing future harm and achieving justice. While it may be difficult, coming forward can save lives and contribute to meaningful change.
• Protecting Yourself: If you are approached about hazing, consider seeking your own legal advice. An attorney can help you understand your rights and potential risks, navigate your role as a witness, and ensure you are protected from self-incrimination or retribution.

Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

Knowing what not to do is as crucial as knowing what to do. Avoid these common errors that can severely weaken a hazing case for Burnet County families:

1. Letting your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence: Parents often want to protect their child from getting in trouble, but deleting digital evidence (group chats, texts, photos) can be seen as obstruction of justice and makes proving a case nearly impossible. Always preserve everything immediately, even if it seems embarrassing.
2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly: While your anger is justified, a direct confrontation allows defendants to immediately lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defenses. Document everything privately, then call a lawyer before any direct contact.
3. Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms: Universities may pressure families into signing waivers or “internal resolution” agreements. Do NOT sign anything without consulting an attorney, as you may inadvertently waive your right to pursue legal action later. Settlements offered by universities are often far below the true value of your case.
4. Posting details on social media before talking to a lawyer: Sharing details on public platforms before legal consultation can harm your case. Defense attorneys will scour social media for inconsistencies, and public posts can jeopardize legal strategy or waive certain protections. Let your lawyer guide any public messaging.
5. Letting your child go back to “one last meeting” or to talk to the organization: The organization or its members may try to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can be used against your child. Once you consider legal action, all communication should go through your lawyer.
6. Waiting “to see how the university handles it”: Universities are institutions with their own interests. While they may launch an investigation, critical evidence can disappear, witnesses graduate, and the statute of limitations can run out. Preserve evidence immediately and consult a lawyer, as the university’s internal process is separate from legal accountability.
7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer: Insurance adjusters are trained to minimize payouts. Any recorded statement you give can be used against you, and initial settlement offers are typically low. Politely decline to speak and refer them to your attorney.

Short FAQ

“Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT have some sovereign immunity protections, meaning they can only be sued under specific conditions (e.g., if their gross negligence led to the harm, or if federal laws like Title IX were violated). Private universities like SMU and Baylor have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on its specific facts—contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

“Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
Yes, it can be. While hazing is typically a Class B misdemeanor, Texas law elevates hazing to a state jail felony if it causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who fail to report hazing can also face misdemeanor charges.

“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 recognize that “consent” given under peer pressure, within a power imbalance, or out of fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent.

“How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
Generally, in Texas, you have 2 years from the date of injury or death to file a hazing lawsuit. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this if the harm or its cause was not immediately known. In cases involving cover-ups, fraud, or where the victim was a minor, the statute of limitations may be tolled (paused). Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to discuss your specific timeline.

“What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
The location of the hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities or sororities can still be held responsible based on their sponsorship, knowledge of the activities, control over the organization, and principles of foreseeability. Many major hazing cases that resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments, such as the Pi Delta Psi retreat case, occurred at “off-campus” or “unofficial” locations.

“Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
Most hazing cases settle confidentially before going to trial. Our firm can work to protect your family’s privacy, including requesting sealed court records and confidential settlement terms, while still fighting for accountability and justice. We prioritize victim privacy while ensuring perpetrators are held responsible.

Complete Texas University Directory

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

• Abilene Christian University | Abilene, Taylor County | Private Non-Profit
• Hardin-Simmons University | Abilene, Taylor County | Private Non-Profit
• McMurry University | Abilene, Taylor County | Private Non-Profit
• Abilene Christian University-Undergraduate Online | Addison, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Sul Ross State University | Alpine, Brewster County | Public University
• Arlington Baptist University | Arlington, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• The University of Texas at Arlington | Arlington, Tarrant County | Public University
• Trinity Valley Community College | Athens, Henderson County | Public University
• AOMA Graduate School of Integrative Medicine | Austin, Travis County | Private For-Profit
• Austin Community College District | Austin, Travis County | Public University
• Austin Graduate School of Theology | Austin, Travis County | Private Non-Profit
• Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary | Austin, Travis County | Private Non-Profit
• Concordia University Texas | Austin, Travis County | Private Non-Profit
• Episcopal Theological Seminary of the Southwest | Austin, Travis County | Private Non-Profit
• Galen Health Institutes-Austin Campus | Austin, Williamson County | Private For-Profit
• Gemini School of Visual Arts & Communication | Austin, Williamson County | Private For-Profit
• Huston-Tillotson University | Austin, Travis County | Private Non-Profit
• Saint Edward’s University | Austin, Travis County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas Health and Science University | Austin, Travis County | Private For-Profit
• The University of Texas at Austin | Austin, Travis County | Public University
• The University of Texas System Office | Austin, Travis County | Public University
• The Art Institute of Austin | Bastrop, Bastrop County | Private For-Profit
• Lamar University | Beaumont, Jefferson County | Public University
• Messenger College | Bedford, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• University of Mary Hardin-Baylor | Belton, Bell County | Private Non-Profit
• Howard Payne University | Brownwood, Brown County | Private Non-Profit
• West Texas A & M University | Canyon, Randall County | Public University
• Texas A & M University-College Station | College Station, Brazos County | Public University
• Texas A & M University-System Office | College Station, Brazos County | Public University
• Texas A & M University-Commerce | Commerce, Hunt County | Public University
• Grace School of Theology | Conroe, Montgomery County | Private Non-Profit
• Del Mar College | Corpus Christi, Nueces County | Public University
• Texas A & M University-Corpus Christi | Corpus Christi, Nueces County | Public University
• Arizona College of Nursing-Dallas | Dallas, Dallas County | Private For-Profit
• Bakke Graduate University | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Criswell College | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Dallas Baptist University | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Dallas Christian College | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Dallas College | Dallas, Dallas County | Public University
• Dallas Theological Seminary | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Miami International University of Art & Design-Art Institute Dallas | Dallas, Dallas County | Private For-Profit
• Parker University | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Paul Quinn College | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Remington College-Dallas Campus | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Southern Methodist University | Dallas, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• University of North Texas at Dallas | Dallas, Dallas County | Public University
• University of North Texas System | Dallas, Dallas County | Public University
• University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center | Dallas, Dallas County | Public University
• Wade College | Dallas, Dallas County | Private For-Profit
• Grayson College | Denison, Grayson County | Public University
• Texas Woman’s University | Denton, Denton County | Public University
• University of North Texas | Denton, Denton County | Public University
• The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley | Edinburg, Hidalgo County | Public University
• Southwest University at El Paso | El Paso, El Paso County | Private For-Profit
• Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center-El Paso | El Paso, El Paso County | Public University
• The University of Texas at El Paso | El Paso, El Paso County | Public University
• Western Technical College | El Paso, El Paso County | Private For-Profit
• Western Technical College | El Paso, El Paso County | Private For-Profit
• Strayer University-Texas | Farmers Branch, Dallas County | Private For-Profit
• Brite Divinity School | Fort Worth, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• Remington College-Fort Worth Campus | Fort Worth, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas Christian University | Fort Worth, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas Wesleyan University | Fort Worth, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• The Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary | Fort Worth, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• University of North Texas Health Science Center | Fort Worth, Tarrant County | Public University
• Galveston College | Galveston, Galveston County | Public University
• The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston | Galveston, Galveston County | Public University
• Amberton University | Garland, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Southwestern University | Georgetown, Williamson County | Private Non-Profit
• RCCGNA Seminary | Greenville, Hunt County | Private Non-Profit
• Jarvis Christian University | Hawkins, Wood County | Private Non-Profit
• American College of Acupuncture and Oriental Med | Houston, Harris County | Private For-Profit
• American InterContinental University-Houston | Houston, Harris County | Private For-Profit
• Baylor College of Medicine | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Chamberlain University-Texas | Houston, Harris County | Private For-Profit
• College of Biblical Studies-Houston | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Galen Health Institutes-Houston | Houston, Harris County | Private For-Profit
• Houston Baptist University | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Houston Graduate School of Theology | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Remington College-North Houston Campus | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Rice University | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• South Texas College of Law Houston | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas Southern University | Houston, Harris County | Public University
• The Art Institute of Houston | Houston, Harris County | Private For-Profit
• The College of Health Care Professions-Northwest | Houston, Harris County | Private For-Profit
• The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston | Houston, Harris County | Public University
• The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center | Houston, Harris County | Public University
• University of Houston | Houston, Harris County | Public University
• University of Houston-Clear Lake | Houston, Harris County | Public University
• University of Houston-Downtown | Houston, Harris County | Public University
• University of Houston-System Administration | Houston, Harris County | Public University
• University of Phoenix-Texas | Houston, Harris County | Private For-Profit
• University of St Thomas | Houston, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Sam Houston State University | Huntsville, Walker County | Public University
• DeVry University-Texas | Irving, Dallas County | Private For-Profit
• University of Dallas | Irving, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• Baptist Missionary Association Theological Seminary | Jacksonville, Cherokee County | Private Non-Profit
• Southwestern Adventist University | Keene, Johnson County | Private Non-Profit
• Schreiner University | Kerrville, Kerr County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas A&M University-Central Texas | Killeen, Bell County | Public University
• Texas A & M International University | Laredo, Webb County | Public University
• Texas A & M University-Kingsville | Kingsville, Kleberg County | Public University
• Brazosport College | Lake Jackson, Brazoria County | Public University
• Laredo College | Laredo, Webb County | Public University
• LeTourneau University | Longview, Gregg County | Private Non-Profit
• Lubbock Christian University | Lubbock, Lubbock County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas Tech University | Lubbock, Lubbock County | Public University
• Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center | Lubbock, Lubbock County | Public University
• Texas Tech University System Administration | Lubbock, Lubbock County | Public University
• East Texas Baptist University | Marshall, Harrison County | Private Non-Profit
• Wiley College | Marshall, Harrison County | Private Non-Profit
• South Texas College | McAllen, Hidalgo County | Public University
• Collin County Community College District | McKinney, Collin County | Public University
• Midland College | Midland, Midland County | Public University
• Stephen F Austin State University | Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County | Public University
• Odessa College | Odessa, Ector County | Public University
• The University of Texas Permian Basin | Odessa, Ector County | Public University
• San Jacinto Community College | Pasadena, Harris County | Public University
• Texas Chiropractic College Foundation Inc | Pasadena, Harris County | Private Non-Profit
• Wayland Baptist University | Plainview, Hale County | Private Non-Profit
• Prairie View A & M University | Prairie View, Waller County | Public University
• Chicago School of Professional Psychology at Dallas | Richardson, Dallas County | Private Non-Profit
• The University of Texas at Dallas | Richardson, Dallas County | Public University
• West Coast University-Dallas | Richardson, Dallas County | Private For-Profit
• South University-Austin | Round Rock, Williamson County | Private For-Profit
• Angelo State University | San Angelo, Tom Green County | Public University
• Baptist Health System School of Health Professions | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private For-Profit
• Baptist University of the Americas | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• Christ Mission College | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• Galen College of Nursing-San Antonio | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private For-Profit
• Hallmark University | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• Oblate School of Theology | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• Our Lady of the Lake University | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• San Antonio College | San Antonio, Bexar County | Public University
• St. Mary’s University | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas A&M University-San Antonio | San Antonio, Bexar County | Public University
• The Art Institute of San Antonio | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private For-Profit
• The University of Texas at San Antonio | San Antonio, Bexar County | Public University
• The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio | San Antonio, Bexar County | Public University
• Trinity University | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• University of the Incarnate Word | San Antonio, Bexar County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas State University | San Marcos, Hays County | Public University
• Texas Lutheran University | Seguin, Guadalupe County | Private Non-Profit
• Austin College | Sherman, Grayson County | Private Non-Profit
• The King’s University | Southlake, Tarrant County | Private Non-Profit
• North American University | Stafford, Fort Bend County | Private Non-Profit
• Tarleton State University | Stephenville, Erath County | Public University
• Southwestern Christian College | Terrell, Kaufman County | Private Non-Profit
• Texas A&M University-Texarkana | Texarkana, Bowie County | Public University
• College of the Mainland | Texas City, Galveston County | Public University
• Lone Star College System | The Woodlands, Montgomery County | Public University
• Texas College | Tyler, Smith County | Private Non-Profit
• The University of Texas at Tyler | Tyler, Smith County | Public University
• Tyler Junior College | Tyler, Smith County | Public University
• University of Houston-Victoria | Victoria, Victoria County | Public University
• Baylor University | Waco, McLennan County | Private Non-Profit
• Southwestern Assemblies of God University | Waxahachie, Ellis County | Private Non-Profit
• Weatherford College | Weatherford, Parker County | Public University
• Midwestern State University | Wichita Falls, Wichita County | Public University

Complete Texas Greek Organization Directory

Attorney911 tracks every IRS-registered fraternity and sorority in Texas:

• UPSILON ZETA BUILDING ASSOCIATION OF CHI OMEGA | EIN: 75-2290669 | AMARILLO, TX
• IOTA ALPHA CHAPTER OF KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 51-0225632 | ARLINGTON, TX
• KAPPA EPSILON CHAPTER OF KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 75-1727080 | ARLINGTON, TX
• LAMBDA ETA CHAPTER CHI ETA PHI SORORITY INCORPORATED | EIN: 75-2273565 | ARLINGTON, TX
• OMICRON GAMMA GAMMA CHAPTER | EIN: 75-2819136 | ARLINGTON, TX
• BUILDING CORPORATION OF DELTA CHAPTER OF ALPHA DELTA PI | EIN: 74-6047117 | AUSTIN, TX
• CHI OMEGA FRATERNITY | EIN: 74-0555581 | AUSTIN, TX
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 46-3831593 | AUSTIN, TX
• LAMBDA CHI ALPHA FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 74-1130606 | AUSTIN, TX
• SIGMA ALPHA OMEGA CHRISTIAN SORORITY INC | EIN: 85-1262394 | AUSTIN, TX
• SIGMA GAMMA RHO SORORITY INC | EIN: 74-6084912 | AUSTIN, TX
• SIGMA LAMBDA ALPHA SORORITY INC | EIN: 90-0956019 | AUSTIN, TX
• TEJAS FOUNDATION | EIN: 74-6062730 | AUSTIN, TX
• ALPHA OMEGA EPSILON | EIN: 56-2652714 | BEAUMONT, TX
• SOUTH TEXAS COTILLON INC | EIN: 26-2378154 | BROWNSVILLE, TX
• FRANK HEFLIN FOUNDATION | EIN: 20-3507402 | CANYON, TX
• NATIONAL PAN-HELLENIC COUNCIL NORTH DALLAS SUBURBIA | EIN: 26-4080411 | CARROLLTON, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 81-2525354 | COLLEGE STA, TX
• ETA ALPHA HOUSE CORPORATION OF KAPPA DELTA SORORITY | EIN: 74-2930349 | COLLEGE STA, TX
• GENTLEMEN OF AGGIE TRADITION | EIN: 88-0537463 | COLLEGE STA, TX
• TEXAS NU-PHI DELTA THETA FRATERNITY | EIN: 81-4123811 | COLLEGE STA, TX
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 90-0293166 | COLLEGE STATION, TX
• KAPPA SIGMA – MU CAMMA CHAPTER INC | EIN: 13-3048786 | COLLEGE STATION, TX
• SIGMA NU CORPORATION OF OKLAHOMA | EIN: 73-6098935 | COLLEYVILLE, TX
• SIGMA CHI FRATERNITY ZETA ETA | EIN: 75-6060974 | COMMERCE, TX
• SIGMA GAMMA RHO SORORITY | EIN: 75-2609909 | COMMERCE, TX
• LAMBDA NU GAMMA FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 93-2103520 | CONROE, TX
• LAMBDA OMEGA EPSILON SORORITY INC | EIN: 86-1854073 | CONROE, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA | EIN: 83-3053639 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA ALPHA CHI CHAPTER | EIN: 86-3999517 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA ALPHA PSI CHAPTER | EIN: 87-4252223 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 82-3971493 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 20-2203769 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 20-1237505 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 81-4575228 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 26-0805977 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 90-0657756 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 32-0217610 | CORINTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI LAMBDA INC | EIN: 46-0766525 | CORINTH, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 83-1418972 | CORPUS CHRISTI, TX
• AGGIE ADPI FAMILY CLUB | EIN: 93-2357531 | CYPRESS, TX
• CHI EPSILON SIGMA INC | EIN: 45-1677063 | DALLAS, TX
• DELTA ALPHA SIGMA MULTICULTURAL SORORITY | EIN: 36-4806998 | DALLAS, TX
• DELTA PHI CHAPTER OF THETA CHI FRATERNITY ALUMNI HOUSING | EIN: 90-0239693 | DALLAS, TX
• FRIENDSHIP-WEST MIZPAH FOUNDATION | EIN: 27-1863731 | DALLAS, TX
• KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY | EIN: 52-1278573 | DALLAS, TX
• ZETA SIGMA HOUSE CORPORATION OF KAPPA KAPPA GAMMA FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 75-2620706 | DALLAS, TX
• ALPHA EPSILON PI FRATERNITY | EIN: 26-2025321 | DENTON, TX
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 26-3170920 | DENTON, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 87-2222906 | EL PASO, TX
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 38-3742830 | EL PASO, TX
• DENTON-LEWISVILLE GUIDE RIGHT FOUNDATION | EIN: 86-1205340 | FLOWER MOUND, TX
• BETA UPSILON CHI | EIN: 74-2911848 | FORT WORTH, TX
• EPSILON MU CHAPTER OF THE SIGMA CHI FRATERNITY | EIN: 75-6203190 | FORT WORTH, TX
• FIRST COMMAND EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION | EIN: 75-1973894 | FORT WORTH, TX
• FORT WORTH ALUMNI CHAPTER OF KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY INCORPORATED | EIN: 75-2755600 | FORT WORTH, TX
• GAMMA PHI DELTA CHRISTIAN FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 74-2893931 | FORT WORTH, TX
• KAPPA SIGMA FRATERNITY | EIN: 75-6067776 | FORT WORTH, TX
• PSI ZETA CHAPTER OF ZETA PHI BETA SORORITY INCORPORATED | EIN: 52-1345182 | FORT WORTH, TX
• SIGMA PHI EPSILON FRATERNITY TEXAS GAMMA CHAPTER | EIN: 91-1981478 | FORT WORTH, TX
• TEXAS KAPPA SIGMA EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC | EIN: 74-1380362 | FORT WORTH, TX
• BETA NU PI KAPPA PHI FRATERNITY HOUSING CORPORATION INC | EIN: 46-2267515 | FRISCO, TX
• ETA KAPPA CHAPTER OF SIGMA SIGMA SIGMA HOUSE CORPORATION | EIN: 75-2935462 | FRISCO, TX
• FRISCO TX ALUMNI CHAPTER OF KAPPA ALPHA PSI INCORPORATED | EIN: 92-0575785 | FRISCO, TX
• KAPPA THETA PI – MU CHAPTER CORPORATION | EIN: 33-1294470 | FRISCO, TX
• ARLINGTON-GRAND PRAIRIE ALUMNI CHAP OF KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRAT INC | EIN: 23-2452759 | GRAND PRAIRIE, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 47-5370943 | HOUSTON, TX
• BETA LAMBDA CHAPTER – ZETA PHI BETA SORORITY INC | EIN: 99-0483761 | HOUSTON, TX
• DELTA PHI UPSILON FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 80-0209640 | HOUSTON, TX
• HELLENIC PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY OF TEXAS | EIN: 74-2020182 | HOUSTON, TX
• LELAND COLLEGE PREP PTO | EIN: 47-2160315 | HOUSTON, TX
• SIGMA CHI FRATERNITY EPSILON XI CHAPTER | EIN: 74-6084905 | HOUSTON, TX
• SIGMA PHI EPSILON NEW YORK CHI ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC | EIN: 26-2710856 | HOUSTON, TX
• SOCIETY OF HISPANIC PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS INC | EIN: 76-0221936 | HOUSTON, TX
• SOUTHWESTERN REGION OF IOTA PHI LAMBDA SORORITY INCORPORATED | EIN: 51-0194762 | HOUSTON, TX
• ZETA PHI BETA SORORITY INCORPORATED – SIGMA GAMMA CHAPTER | EIN: 39-2352450 | HOUSTON, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 92-1490845 | HUNTSVILLE, TX
• ONE CHAPTER ONE SHIELD | EIN: 92-1743777 | IOWA COLONY, TX
• OMICRON GAMMA SIGMA ALUMNI CHAPTER OF PHI BETA SIGMA FRATERNITY | EIN: 92-1672050 | IRVING, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 83-1418666 | KINGSVILLE, TX
• ZETA PHI BETA SORORITY INC | EIN: 61-1562040 | LEWISVILLE, TX
• ALPHA OMEGA EPSILON-BETA ALPHA CHAPTER | EIN: 47-3967233 | LUBBOCK, TX
• EPSILON NU HOUSING CORPORATION | EIN: 23-7359384 | LUBBOCK, TX
• FARM HOUSE FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 75-1565336 | LUBBOCK, TX
• GAMMA PHI HOUSE CORPORATION OF KAPPA ALPHA THETA FRATERNITY | EIN: 75-1283953 | LUBBOCK, TX
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 82-0644459 | LUBBOCK, TX
• TKE OP HOUSING | EIN: 47-5033161 | LUBBOCK, TX
• KAPPA SIGMA – MU GAMMA CHAPTER INC | EIN: 27-3662583 | LUFKIN, TX
• KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 45-3325054 | MANSFIELD, TX
• ALPHA DELTA | EIN: 81-2724215 | MCALLEN, TX
• GULF COAST ALUMNI ET OF OX INC | EIN: 45-2717861 | MEXIA, TX
• PI KAPPA PHI DELTA OMEGA CHAPTER BUILDING CORPORATION | EIN: 37-1768785 | MISSOURI CITY, TX
• ALPHA TAU OMEGA HOUSING CORPORATION OF ETA IOTA CHAPTER | EIN: 30-0517788 | NACOGDOCHES, TX
• CHI OMEGA FRATERNITY | EIN: 75-6041410 | NACOGDOCHES, TX
• EPSILON TAU CHAPTER OF THETA CHI FRATERNITY | EIN: 75-6053083 | NACOGDOCHES, TX
• PHI KAPPA PSI TEXAS EPSILON CHAPTER | EIN: 45-2729519 | NACOGDOCHES, TX
• PI KAPPA ALPHA FRATERNITY | EIN: 74-6064445 | NEDERLAND, TX
• TEXAS EPSILON UPSILON CHAPTER | EIN: 76-0366414 | NEEDVILLE, TX
• ZETA PHI BETA SORORITY INC | EIN: 52-1345951 | NOLANVILLE, TX
• ZETA OMICRON ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC | EIN: 90-0949447 | PONDER, TX
• KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY | EIN: 23-7279532 | PRAIRIE VIEW, TX
• ZETA BETA CHAPTER OF KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 23-7098953 | PRAIRIE VIEW, TX
• SIGMA PHI EPSILON TEXAS ETA | EIN: 82-4398421 | RICHMOND, TX
• EPSILON PI PHI EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT HONOR SOCIETY | EIN: 47-4643399 | ROUND ROCK, TX
• 9THD BROTHERS KEEPER | EIN: 93-4008573 | ROWLETT, TX
• ZETA XI PEARLS EDUCATIONAL FUND INC | EIN: 88-3484848 | ROWLETT, TX
• ALPHA EPSILON DELTA | EIN: 52-1850764 | SAN ANTONIO, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 81-5229133 | SAN ANTONIO, TX
• PHI DELTA THETA FRATERNITY | EIN: 90-0927378 | SAN ANTONIO, TX
• PHI UPSILON ZETA OF LAMBDA CHI ALPHA FRATERNITY | EIN: 74-1016658 | SAN ANTONIO, TX
• UTSA SIGMA CHI | EIN: 84-2643090 | SAN ANTONIO, TX
• ALPHA SIGMA PHI FRATERNITY INC | EIN: 47-5381060 | SAN MARCOS, TX
• SIGMA ALPHA EPSILON – TEXAS SIGMA INCORPORATED | EIN: 88-2755427 | SAN MARCOS, TX
• TEXAS BETA PSI CHAPTER OF ALPHA DELTA KAPPA SORORITY INC | EIN: 74-6088185 | SHAVANO PARK, TX
• THE ETHEL HEDGEMON LYLE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS | EIN: 76-0592907 | SPRING, TX
• RHO DELTA CHI NATIONAL BOARD | EIN: 93-4247450 | SUGAR LAND, TX
• GAMMA PHI BETA SORORITY INC | EIN: 16-1675890 | THE WOODLANDS, TX
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 35-2335400 | TYLER, TX
• HONOR SOCIETY OF PHI KAPPA PHI | EIN: 90-0293167 | VICTORIA, TX
• SIGMA GAMMA RHO SORORITY | EIN: 36-4091267 | WACO, TX
• TEXAS RHO CHAPTER OF THE SIGMA PHI EPSILON FRATERNITY | EIN: 74-1942292 | WACO, TX
• ZETA PHI BETA SORORITY INCORPORATED NU IOTA CHAPTER BAYLOR UNIVERSITY | EIN: 52-1346485 | WACO, TX
• BETA ALUMNAE CHAPTER OF ALPHA SIGMA KAPPA WOMEN IN TECHNICAL STUDIES | EIN: 73-1568644 | WEATHERFORD, TX
• GAMMA IOTA CHAPTER OF GAMMA PHI BETA SORORITY INC | EIN: 75-1225585 | WICHITA FALLS, TX
• REDWINE HONORS PROGRAM STUDENT COUNCIL | EIN: 84-5090974 | WICHITA FALLS, TX

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action for Burnet County Families

At Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, we understand that when your family in Burnet County faces a hazing incident, you need more than just legal representation. You need advocates who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. Our firm is uniquely qualified to handle complex hazing cases in Texas, combining specialized legal insight with an unwavering commitment to our clients.

Why Attorney911 for Hazing Cases

Our firm is founded on a deep understanding of the tactics employed by large organizations and their insurers, which is precisely why we excel in hazing litigation against universities and national Greek organizations.

• Insurance Insider Advantage (Lupe Peña): Our Associate Attorney, Lupe Peña, brings an invaluable perspective to every hazing case. As a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm, she knows exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies evaluate, and often undervalue, hazing claims. Lupe understands their delay tactics, their arguments for coverage exclusion, and their settlement strategies because she used to be on their side. “We know their playbook because we used to run it,” she often says. This unparalleled insight allows us to anticipate their moves and build a stronger case for you. Hablamos Español, ensuring we can serve a diverse range of clients from Burnet County and across Texas.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions (Ralph Manginello): Managing Partner Ralph Manginello is no stranger to taking on formidable opponents. He was one of the few Texas attorneys involved in litigation stemming from the BP Texas City explosion, a complex federal case that demonstrated his ability to fight against billion-dollar corporations and win. With extensive experience in federal courts, including the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, our firm is not intimidated by powerful national fraternities, well-resourced universities, or their sophisticated defense teams. We have a proven track record of achieving multi-million dollar wrongful death and catastrophic injury results, demonstrating that “we don’t settle cheap. We build cases that force accountability.”
• Dual Criminal and Civil Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the Houston County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) underscores our unique ability to navigate both the criminal and civil aspects of hazing cases. This is crucial because hazing often involves criminal charges against individuals alongside civil claims for damages. We understand how these two legal tracks interact and can advise on strategies that account for both criminal exposure and civil liability, making our firm an even more comprehensive resource for Burnet County families.
• Investigative Depth: We pride ourselves on the meticulous detail of our investigations. Our team leverages a network of experts—including medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists—to uncover and preserve every piece of evidence. Whether it’s obtaining deleted group chats, subpoenaing national fraternity records that show prior incidents, or uncovering university files through discovery and public records requests, “we investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.”
• Empathetic and Victim-Centric Approach: We know that facing a hazing incident is one of the hardest things a family can endure. Our role extends beyond legal strategy; it encompasses providing compassionate support and zealous advocacy. We are committed to getting you answers, holding the right people accountable, and working to prevent similar tragedies from happening to another family.

As a Houston-based Texas personal injury firm, Attorney911 serves clients throughout Texas, including the communities of Burnet County and its surroundings. We understand that hazing at Texas universities impacts families far beyond campus borders, and we are dedicated to providing the highest caliber legal representation, whether your child attends a school in Houston, Austin, College Station, Dallas, or Waco.

Call to Action for Burnet County Families

If you or your child has experienced the profound impact of hazing at any Texas campus, we want to hear from you. Families in Burnet County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers and accountability.

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

In your free consultation, we will:

• Listen to your story and the details of the incident.
• Review any evidence you have collected, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• Explain your legal options, including pursuing a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, or both.
• Discuss realistic timelines and what to expect during the legal process.
• Answer your questions about our contingency fee structure – meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case.

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

Contact Attorney911 (The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC):

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

Hablamos Español: If you prefer communication in Spanish, please contact Lupe Peña directly at lupe@atty911.com for consultation. 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