coleman-county-featured-image.png

Coleman County Fraternity Hazing Attorneys | Attorney911 — The Firm That Closed Beta Nu, Exposing $24M in Pike Settlements | Federal Court | Former Insurance Defense | 1-888-ATTY-911

Coleman County, Earth, North America, Texas, United States

Hazing stands as a shadow across the collegiate landscape, casting its long, detrimental presence over what should be a period of growth and learning. For families in Coleman County and throughout Texas, the dream of a child thriving at a university like the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor can quickly turn to a nightmare when hazing enters the picture. This isn’t merely about college traditions; it’s about the safety, dignity, and future of young lives.

We know that when your child sets off for college, you anticipate them embracing new friendships, pursuing academic excellence, and discovering their passions. The last thing any parent from Coleman County expects is for their child to suffer harm, humiliation, or trauma in the name of belonging. Yet, hazing incidents continue to plague campuses, leaving emotional and physical scars that can last a lifetime.

This guide is designed for Coleman County families and all Texans to navigate the complex world of hazing. We delve into what modern hazing looks like, examine Texas and federal laws designed to stop it, draw lessons from national tragedies, and focus specifically on the environments at major Texas universities. Our goal is to equip you with the knowledge needed to protect your loved ones and understand the avenues for legal recourse when the unthinkable happens. Whether you are a parent, a concerned student, or a witness, this comprehensive resource offers insights and practical advice, grounded in the legal expertise of Attorney911.

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 Coleman County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or collegiate organizations, it’s crucial to understand that hazing extends far beyond the outdated images of forced calisthenics or silly pranks. In 2025, hazing has evolved, often becoming more insidious, hidden, and dangerous, particularly with the advent of digital communication.

Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

At its core, hazing is any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, whether on or off campus, performed by an individual or a group against a student, that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of that student. This act must occur for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

This legal definition is vital because it emphasizes several critical points:

  • Intent is not always necessary: Even “reckless” behavior, where the perpetrator should have known the risks, qualifies.
  • Mental or physical harm: Hazing isn’t just about bruises; it deeply impacts mental health through humiliation, manipulation, and intimidation.
  • “Consent” is irrelevant: Texas law explicitly states that “I agreed to it” does not make it legal. When there’s a power imbalance, fear of exclusion, or intense peer pressure, genuine consent cannot exist.

Main Categories of Hazing

Hazing manifests in various forms, often layered and escalating from subtle psychological manipulation to overt physical violence.

  • Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is disproportionately responsible for fatalities. It involves forced or coerced drinking of alcohol, often to extreme levels. This includes dangerous “lineup” drinking games, rapid chugging contests, “bottle exchanges,” or being pressured to consume unknown or mixed substances. The goal is often to incapacitate pledges, breaking down their inhibitions and increasing their vulnerability to control.

  • Physical Hazing: While seemingly old-fashioned, this remains prevalent. It encompasses:

    • Paddling and beatings: Direct physical assault.
    • Extreme calisthenics: Punitive “workouts,” “smokings,” or forced exercises far beyond any reasonable athletic conditioning, designed to induce exhaustion or injury.
    • Sleep and food/water deprivation: Denying new members adequate rest, meals, or hydration, leading to physical and mental deterioration.
    • Exposure: Forcing pledges into harsh environments, such as extreme cold or heat, or placing them in dangerous locations for “drop-offs” where they must find their way back.

  • Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This category is deeply traumatic and often involves profound psychological and emotional harm, in addition to physical risks:

    • Forced nudity or partial nudity: Stripping pledges.
    • Simulated sexual acts: Forcing individuals to perform or participate in degrading sexual acts, “elephant walks,” “roasted pig” poses, or other sexually suggestive actions.
    • Public humiliation: Making pledges perform embarrassing acts in public, wear degrading costumes, or endure verbal abuse and ridicule in front of others.
    • Discriminatory acts: Hazing with racist, sexist, homophobic, or religious-based overtones, including forced slurs or role-playing stereotypes.

  • Psychological Hazing: This is often the most insidious and hardest to prove, but it undermines a student’s self-worth and autonomy:

    • Verbal abuse and threats: Constant yelling, insults, derogatory names, and threats of social exclusion or physical harm.
    • Isolation: Forbidding contact with outside friends, family, or other pledges.
    • Manipulation and coercion: Forcing pledges to lie, keep secrets, or betray personal values.
    • Control: Dictating what pledges wear, when they sleep, or who they can speak to.

  • Digital/Online Hazing: With the rise of social media and messaging apps, hazing has found new, pervasive channels:

    • Group chat dares and humiliation: Pressuring pledges to perform embarrassing acts for videos shared on Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, or private group chats.
    • 24/7 digital control: Constant text messages and phone calls at all hours, demanding immediate responses, leading to severe sleep deprivation and anxiety.
    • Location tracking: Requiring pledges to share their live location via apps like “Find My Friends,” creating a constant sense of surveillance.
    • Cyberbullying: Spreading rumors, posting unflattering photos, or using digital platforms to psychologically torment new members.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception among Coleman County families that hazing is exclusively a “fraternity problem.” While Greek organizations are frequently implicated, hazing has been documented across a wide spectrum of collegiate groups:

  • Fraternities and Sororities: This includes social groups under the Interfraternity Council (IFC) and Panhellenic Council, as well as historically Black (NPHC) and multicultural Greek organizations.
  • Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: These organizations, particularly those with strong hierarchical structures, have a documented history of hazing incidents, often involving strenuous physical training or endurance tests under the guise of “building brotherhood” or “discipline.”
  • Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming, soccer, cheerleading, and even club sports, hazing is unfortunately prevalent. It can include forced substance use, physical abuse, or humiliating rituals that coaches and university staff may turn a blind eye to.
  • Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups are not immune. Traditions in bands, theater groups, or a cappella ensembles can sometimes devolve into hazing, relying on secrecy and historical precedent.
  • Other Student Organizations: Some service clubs, cultural associations, and academic societies have also faced hazing allegations, demonstrating that the drive for belonging combined with perceived power dynamics can create ripe conditions for abusive practices in any student group.

The common thread across all these environments is the enforcement of a social hierarchy through rituals that dehumanize new members, exploit their desire for acceptance, and maintain a culture of secrecy, intimidation, and loyalty above all else. For Coleman County families, understanding these diverse manifestations is the first step in prevention and protection.

LAW & LIABILITY FRAMEWORK (TEXAS + FEDERAL)

For families in Coleman County, understanding the legal landscape of hazing in Texas is paramount. Hazing is not just a campus policy violation; it can be a serious criminal offense and a basis for significant civil litigation designed to achieve both justice and financial compensation for victims.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Under Texas law—which governs cases in Coleman County and throughout the state—hazing is explicitly prohibited and broadly defined within the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This code applies to all educational institutions in Texas, from public colleges and universities to private institutions.

§ 37.151. Definition
Hazing means any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student, that:

  • Endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student,
  • And occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

Plain English for Coleman County Families:
If someone makes your child do something dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a student group, and they were aware of the risk or simply didn’t care (i.e., were reckless), that directly falls under the legal definition of hazing in Texas. Importantly, this still applies even if the act happens far from campus the specific school your child attends might be.

Key aspects of this definition that are crucial for Coleman County residents to grasp:

  • Location doesn’t matter: “On or off campus” means incidents in private homes, Airbnbs, or remote locations are still covered.
  • Mental or physical harm: This includes psychological abuse, humiliation, or intimidation, not just physical injury.
  • “Reckless” conduct is sufficient: The perpetrators don’t have to intend to cause harm; merely disregarding the known risks is enough for a violation.
  • “Consent” is not a defense: Texas law explicitly states that a student cannot “consent” to hazing. The power dynamics often inherent in these situations mean that consent given under pressure is not true consent in the eyes of the law.

§ 37.152. Criminal Penalties
Hazing in Texas carries criminal penalties:

  • By default, hazing is a Class B Misdemeanor, punishable by fines up to $2,000 and/or up to 180 days in county jail.
  • If the hazing causes bodily injury, it becomes a Class A Misdemeanor.
  • Most critically, if hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it is upgraded to a State Jail Felony, carrying a potential sentence of up to two years in a state jail and significant fines.

Furthermore, Texas law holds individuals accountable for their silence:

  • Failing to report hazing: An officer or member of an organization who knows of hazing and fails to report it can also face misdemeanor charges.
  • Retaliating against a reporter: Individuals who retaliate against someone for reporting hazing are subject to misdemeanor charges. This protects students and parents who come forward.

§ 37.153. Organizational Liability
The law extends beyond individuals. Organizations themselves can be held criminally liable:

  • An organization (such as a fraternity, sorority, or club) can be fined up to $10,000 if it authorized or encouraged hazing, or if an officer or member acting in their official capacity knew about hazing and failed to report it.
  • Universities also have the power to revoke recognition of organizations found responsible for hazing.

§ 37.154. Immunity for Good-Faith Reporting
To encourage reporting, Texas law provides immunity:

  • A person who, in good faith, reports a hazing incident to a primary or secondary education official or law enforcement is immune from civil or criminal liability.
  • Many university policies and Texas law also offer “medical amnesty” or “safe harbor” for individuals who call for help in an emergency (e.g., alcohol poisoning), even if they were consuming alcohol underage or involved in the hazing.

These provisions are vital for Coleman County families because they highlight that reporting hazing is legally protected and essential for preventing further harm.

Criminal vs Civil Cases

It’s important for Coleman County families to understand the two distinct legal pathways for addressing hazing:

  • Criminal Cases:

    • These are brought by the state (the District Attorney’s office) against individuals or organizations accused of breaking the law.
    • The aim is punishment (e.g., jail time, fines, probation).
    • Typical hazing-related criminal charges can include the hazing offenses themselves, furnishing alcohol to a minor, assault, or, in tragic fatal cases, even manslaughter or negligent homicide.
    • The burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

  • Civil Cases:

    • These are lawsuits brought by victims and their families directly against the responsible parties.
    • The aim is monetary compensation for the harm suffered (e.g., medical bills, lost income, pain, and suffering) and to compel accountability and institutional change.
    • Civil lawsuits can target individuals, the local chapter, the national organization, property owners, and even the university itself.
    • The burden of proof is lower (“preponderance of the evidence,” meaning more likely than not).

It is crucial to note that a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. Many times, the District Attorney may decide not to pursue criminal charges or individuals may receive light sentences, but a civil lawsuit can still successfully hold the responsible parties accountable and secure compensation for the victim.

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

Beyond state law, federal regulations introduce additional layers of accountability for hazing on Texas campuses:

  • Stop Campus Hazing Act (SCHA): Enacted in 2024, this federal law mandates that colleges and universities receiving federal funding (which includes most institutions) must:

    • Transparently report hazing incidents: Beginning around 2026, institutions must publicly disclose all findings of hazing violations and disciplinary actions taken. This is a significant step towards greater transparency for Coleman County families researching schools.
    • Strengthen prevention: Implement comprehensive hazing prevention programs and education.
    • Provide bystander intervention training: Empower students to intervene when they witness hazing.

  • Title IX: This federal civil rights law prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, or gender-based discrimination or hostility (e.g., forced nudity, simulated sexual acts), Title IX obligations are triggered. This requires universities to investigate, take action to eliminate the hostile environment, and prevent recurrence.

  • Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. While hazing itself isn’t a direct “Clery Crime,” many hazing incidents involve underlying Clery-reportable offenses such as assault, sexual assault, liquor law violations, or drug law violations. The forthcoming SCHA complements these existing federal requirements by specifically targeting hazing.

These federal statutes provide additional tools for holding institutions accountable and for Coleman County families to demand transparency and action.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Determining liability in a civil hazing lawsuit is complex, but it broadly extends beyond just the individuals directly involved. Multiple parties can be held responsible for contributing to the harm:

  • Individual Students: Those who actively planned, enforced, or participated in the hazing acts can be held personally liable for assault, battery, negligence, or intentional infliction of emotional distress.
  • Local Chapter / Organization: The collegiate chapter itself (e.g., a fraternity or sorority chapter, club) can be sued as a distinct legal entity for negligence, vicarious liability (for the actions of its members), or direct liability if the hazing was endorsed by its leadership.
  • National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters of Greek-letter organizations often set policies, collect dues, provide training, and grant charters to local chapters. They can be held liable for:
    • Negligent supervision: Failing to adequately oversee or discipline a local chapter with a known history of hazing.
    • Negligent retention: Allowing a chapter with a pattern of misconduct to continue operating.
    • Failure to warn: Not adequately warning members or chapters about hazardous activities based on patterns experienced elsewhere.
    • Vicarious liability: In some cases, for the actions of their agents (local chapter members) if the national exercised sufficient control.
  • University or Governing Board: While public universities in Texas (like UT, Texas A&M, UH) benefit from some level of sovereign immunity, it is not absolute. Exceptions can apply for:
    • Gross negligence or willful misconduct: If the university’s actions (or inaction) were flagrant.
    • Ministerial duties: If the university failed in a non-discretionary duty, such as enforcing its own published anti-hazing policies after knowing of violations.
    • Title IX violations: If the hazing created a hostile environment based on sex/gender, waving immunity.
    • Individual employee liability: Claims can sometimes be brought against individual university administrators or employees in their personal capacity for their negligent actions.
    • Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections.
  • Third Parties:
    • Property Owners/Landlords: If hazing occurred on private property, the owners might be liable for premises liability if they knew or should have known about dangerous activities.
    • Alcohol Vendors/Providers: Under Texas Dram Shop laws, businesses or individuals who unlawfully provide alcohol to visibly intoxicated persons or minors can be liable if that person subsequently causes injury.
  • Transportation Providers: If pledges are transported unsafely during hazing, those responsible for transport may be liable.

For Coleman County families, it’s critical to understand that the legal strategy in a hazing case often involves meticulously investigating all potentially liable parties to ensure comprehensive accountability and maximum potential recovery for damages.

NATIONAL HAZING CASE PATTERNS (ANCHOR STORIES)

The landscape of hazing litigation has been dramatically shaped by a series of tragic national cases that highlight recurring patterns of abuse, institutional failure, and the devastating consequences for victims and their families. These anchor stories serve as powerful precedents, informing how we approach hazing cases not just nationwide, but specifically for Coleman County families dealing with incidents at Texas universities like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most common and lethal form of hazing involves the forced or coerced consumption of alcohol, often occurring on “pledge nights,” “big/little reveals,” or designated “initiation” events.

  • Timothy Piazza – Penn State, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries after falling repeatedly during a “bid acceptance” event. Fraternity brothers forced him to consume excessive amounts of alcohol and then delayed calling for help for nearly 12 hours despite his obvious distress and multiple falls. The incident, captured on the fraternity’s own security cameras, led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the passage of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. For Coleman County families, this case underscores the lethal combination of extreme intoxication, the deliberate delay in calling 911, and a pervasive culture of silence.

  • Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old FSU pledge, tragically died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night.” Pledges were given full handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them quickly. The incident resulted in criminal hazing charges against multiple fraternity members, and FSU temporarily suspended all Greek life, overhauling its policies. This case illustrates the dangerous “tradition” of forced high-volume alcohol consumption, a script that has played out fatally across many campuses.

  • Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died with a blood alcohol content of 0.495% (nearly six times the legal driving limit) after being forced to participate in a “Bible study” drinking game. Pledges were made to answer trivia questions, and wrong answers resulted in forced drinking. The tragedy led to criminal convictions, including one for negligent homicide, and prompted Louisiana to enact the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute. This case highlights how seemingly innocent “games” can turn deadly and often leads to significant legislative change.

  • 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 drink an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little Night.” His death resulted in multiple criminal convictions against fraternity members, and Bowling Green State University—a public institution—agreed to a nearly $3 million settlement with the Foltz family (with additional settlements from the fraternity and individuals, totaling $10 million). This landmark case sent a clear message that universities bear significant financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities. The chapter president, Daylen Dunson, was personally ordered to pay $6.5 million to the Foltz family, emphasizing individual accountability.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, hazing often involves brutal physical rituals designed to test endurance and loyalty, often in isolated settings.

  • Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, an 18-year-old pledge, died from a traumatic brain injury suffered during a “glass ceiling” ritual at an off-campus retreat in the Pocono Mountains. Blindfolded and wearing a heavy backpack, he was repeatedly tackled. Fraternity members delayed calling 911 for over an hour. This case was pivotal as it led to criminal convictions against multiple members, and the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter—a rare instance of organizational criminal liability. Pi Delta Psi was banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years and fined over $110,000. It demonstrates that off-campus retreats are not immune from legal scrutiny and highlight the severe consequences of physical hazing and delayed medical care.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not confined to Greek life; it is a pervasive issue in athletic programs, particularly those with a strong “tradition” of initiation rites.

  • Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In a scandal that emerged in 2023, former football players alleged widespread sexualized, racist, and abusive hazing within the program over many years. Allegations included forced sexual acts, degrading rituals, and explicit racial harassment. This led to the firing of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who later reached a confidential settlement in a wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university. Multiple lawsuits by former players against Northwestern and its staff are ongoing. This case forcefully demonstrates that hazing, including its most disturbing forms, can be deeply embedded in major athletic programs and raises serious questions about institutional oversight at the highest levels.

What These Cases Mean for Coleman County Families

These national tragedies reveal disturbing common threads: forced intoxication, physical abuse, psychological manipulation, deliberate delays in seeking medical attention, and systematic cover-ups. The unfortunate reality is that significant reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements often materialize only after catastrophic incidents—and after victims and their families courageously pursue litigation.

For Coleman County families, these national lessons underscore that hazing is a predictable and preventable harm. When a Texas chapter engages in behavior mirroring incidents from other states, it can demonstrate a pattern of foreseeability and prior notice, which is critical in pursuing negligence claims against national organizations and universities. You are not alone, and your pursuit of justice in Texas is supported by these national precedents.

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

For Coleman County families, understanding the unique cultures and histories of hazing at Texas’s major universities is crucial. While Coleman County itself may not host a major four-year university, many local students attend these institutions, and the issues that arise there directly impact our community. Attorney911 operates across Texas, with offices in Houston, Austin, and Beaumont, giving us firsthand insight into the dynamics at these schools.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston is a diverse, sprawling urban campus that draws many students from Houston and surrounding areas, including Coleman County. Its vibrant Greek life and a wide array of student organizations contribute significantly to campus culture. As a large public university, UH’s policies and responses to student conduct are particularly relevant to the families we serve across the state.

5.1.1 Campus & culture snapshot

The University of Houston, nestled in the heart of Houston, serves over 47,000 students. It boasts an active Greek life, comprising approximately 40 fraternities and sororities recognized by the Interfraternity Council and Panhellenic organizations. UH’s culture is dynamic, reflecting its urban environment and diverse student body. Many Coleman County families find UH an attractive option due to its academic programs and proximity to the city’s economic opportunities.

5.1.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, explicitly prohibiting any activity that meets the Texas Education Code definition of hazing. Their policy clarifies that such acts are forbidden whether on-campus or off-campus and include forced consumption of alcohol or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical abuse, and mental distress. UH provides several reporting channels through the Dean of Students office, the Center for Student Involvement, the UH Department of Public Safety (UHPD), and online reporting forms.

5.1.3 Example incidents & response

In late 2025, Attorney911 filed a significant $10 million lawsuit on behalf of Leonel Bermudez against the University of Houston, its Board of Regents, Pi Kappa Phi national headquarters, its housing corporation, and 13 individual fraternity leaders and members. This lawsuit alleges severe hazing that left Bermudez with acute kidney failure and rhabdomyolysis.

The hazing allegedly occurred both at the Pi Kappa Phi chapter house and at off-campus locations, including an individual’s residence and Yellowstone Boulevard Park in Houston. Details laid out in the lawsuit paint a chilling picture:

  • Pledges were allegedly forced to carry humiliating “fanny packs” containing condoms, sex toys, and nicotine devices 24/7.
  • Hazing included forced physical exertion, such as 100+ push-ups and 500 squats that left Bermudez unable to stand.
  • He was allegedly subjected to a hose spraying “similar to waterboarding” and threatened with actual waterboarding.
  • Pledges were forced to consume milk, hot dogs, and peppercorns until vomiting, followed by immediate sprints.
  • Bermudez developed severe rhabdomyolysis, breakdown of muscle tissue, and acute kidney failure, characterized by passing “brown urine.” He required a four-day hospitalization.

Attorney Ralph Manginello stated, “His urine was brown,” emphasizing the severity of the rhabdomyolysis. Lupe Peña added, “If this prevents harm to another person…Let’s bring this to light. Enough is enough.” (Click2Houston, ABC13) The Pi Kappa Phi Beta Nu chapter at UH was suspended on November 6, 2025, and surrendered its charter on November 14, 2025. This case, a direct ongoing litigation for Attorney911, underscores the firm’s deep involvement and focus on hazing accountability at Texas institutions. Similar to the national cases, it shows the devastating impact of physical and alcohol-related hazing, as well as the deliberate delay in seeking medical care.

5.1.4 How a UH hazing case might proceed

A hazing case originating at UH involves multiple jurisdictions. The University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) might conduct internal investigations, while severe incidents could involve the Houston Police Department and the Harris County District Attorney’s office for criminal charges. Civil lawsuits against the university, national fraternities, and individuals would proceed in Harris County civil courts. Due to the urban setting, securing video evidence from nearby businesses and recovering digital communications are critical. For Coleman County families, understanding these jurisdictional nuances is key, as the nearest legal resources would be Houston-based.

5.1.5 What UH students & parents should do

For students and parents involved with UH:

  • Familiarize yourself with UH’s specific hazing policies available online.
  • Utilize UH’s anonymous tip line or the Dean of Students office for reporting.
  • Document any suspected hazing with timestamps, screenshots, and witness information.
  • Be aware that Houston’s media outlets, like Click2Houston or ABC13, actively cover local hazing incidents, suggesting a community awareness that can support reporting.
  • Contact a Houston-based hazing lawyer if you suspect harm, as they will have direct experience with the local courts and university administration.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, particularly its Corps of Cadets, embodies a strong sense of tradition that, for some, has unfortunately been misinterpreted as an excuse for hazing. This institution, a powerhouse in Texas higher education, draws a significant number of students from across the state, including Coleman County.

5.2.1 Campus & culture snapshot

Texas A&M University in College Station is renowned for its deep-rooted traditions, loyal alumni network, and, notably, its highly structured Corps of Cadets. Greek life is also a prominent part of the social scene, and A&M boasts a large percentage of students involved in numerous registered student organizations. The culture places a strong emphasis on loyalty, honor, and tradition, which, if not carefully managed, can sometimes be twisted into environments ripe for hazing. Many Coleman County families, like others across Texas, have a strong affinity for A&M and send their children to experience its unique programs.

5.2.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

Texas A&M unequivocally prohibits hazing, adhering strictly to the Texas Education Code definition. Their specific policy notes that prohibited acts include physical activity that subjects a student to pain or suffering, forced consumption of food or drink, sleep deprivation, and any activity that could cause mental anguish. They emphasize a “zero tolerance” policy and encourage reporting through the Student Conduct Office, the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD), or anonymous online forms. The university also publicizes disciplinary actions taken against organizations found in violation.

5.2.3 Example incidents & response

Tragically, Texas A&M has had multiple serious hazing incidents:

  • In the early 2020s, two Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) pledges filed a lawsuit alleging severe chemical burns after fraternity members forced them to participate in a ritual where they were sprayed with a mixture of industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in extensive skin irritation and chemical burns requiring major skin graft surgeries. The fraternity chapter was suspended for two years, and the case highlighted the extreme physical dangers some hazing rituals present.
  • The Corps of Cadets has also faced hazing allegations. A 2023 lawsuit depicted degrading rituals within the Corps, including a cadet allegedly being forced into a “roasted pig” pose with his legs bound and an apple in his mouth, as well as simulated sexual acts. The university stated it addressed the matter through its internal processes, but the lawsuit brought wider attention to hazing risks even in highly structured military programs.

These cases demonstrate that hazing at A&M transcends generic Greek life; it infiltrates institutions as revered and disciplined as the Corps of Cadets.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M hazing case might proceed

Given A&M’s status as a public institution, civil lawsuits would be filed against the university and its Board of Regents, often in Brazos County courts. Similar to UH, sovereign immunity for the university could be a factor, but claims involving gross negligence or Title IX violations might circumvent this. Criminal proceedings might involve the College Station Police Department or Brazos County Sheriff for off-campus incidents. A Coleman County family pursuing a case would need representation familiar with both the legal landscape and the intricate A&M system, including its unique traditions and alumni networks that may influence investigations.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M students & parents should do

  • Parents and students from Coleman County should be particularly vigilant about distinguishing between “tradition” and hazing.
  • Report any concerns directly to Texas A&M’s Student Conduct Office or the Texas A&M UPD.
  • Keep meticulous records of any suspicious activities, communications, or injuries.
  • Be mindful that A&M’s culture of fierce loyalty, while often positive, can sometimes contribute to a code of silence around hazing.
  • Given the history of serious cases, Coleman County families should promptly consult with an experienced hazing attorney who understands the nuances of A&M’s campus and legal environment.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is a flagship institution known for its vibrant student life. While its Greek community is prominent, UT also hosts numerous other student organizations that contribute to its rich campus culture. Many Coleman County students aspire to attend UT, making its stance on hazing critically important.

5.3.1 Campus & culture snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin is one of the largest universities in Texas, boasting a significant Greek life presence along with a multitude of academic, social, and spirit groups. Its culture is characterized by strong school pride, academic rigor, and a dynamic social scene. For Coleman County families, UT is often a top choice, and understanding the potential risks within its various student organizations is vital.

5.3.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

UT Austin has a clear-cut anti-hazing policy that aligns with Texas state law, prohibiting hazing on- or off-campus. The university has made strides in transparency by publicly listing hazing violations on its website, including organization names, dates of incidents, a description of the conduct, and the sanctions imposed. Reporting can be made through the Dean of Students Office, the Title IX Office (if applicable), UTPD, or the Ethics and Compliance Services hotline.

5.3.3 Example incidents & response

UT Austin’s public Hazing Violations page provides invaluable insight into recurring issues:

  • A recent entry for Pi Kappa Alpha involved new members being directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, deemed hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education.
  • Other groups, including the Texas Wranglers (a men’s spirit organization), have been sanctioned for forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, and punishment-based practices, with disciplinary actions ranging from probation to loss of recognition.
  • A tragic Sigma Alpha Epsilon incident in 2006 involved the alcohol-related death of member Tyler Cross, who died in a fall. While university officials initially denied hazing, the circumstances highlighted the dangers of alcohol consumption during fraternity activities.

The transparency provided by UT’s public log is a double-edged sword: it allows Coleman County families to research an organization’s history, but it also reveals the persistent nature of hazing despite public sanctions.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin hazing case might proceed

Hazing cases at UT Austin may involve investigations by the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) for on-campus incidents or the Austin Police Department for off-campus events. Lawsuits against the university would navigate the complexities of sovereign immunity in Travis County courts, where Austin is located. For Coleman County families whose children attend UT, a critical aspect of any potential civil case would be leveraging the publicly available hazing log, which serves as strong evidence of pattern, knowledge, and foreseeability on the part of the university and national organizations. Attorney911 operates in Austin, allowing for direct engagement with local legal and university systems.

5.3.5 What UT Austin students & parents should do

  • Before joining any organization, Coleman County students should consult UT’s public Hazing Violations page (hazing.utexas.edu) to research its history.
  • If you suspect hazing, report it to the Dean of Students or UTPD; note any prior listed violations of the organization.
  • Document everything, paying close attention to any details that mirror past incidents on the public log.
  • If concerned, contact an attorney familiar with UT’s policies and court procedures in Travis County.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University is a private institution in Dallas known for its strong academic programs and a vibrant, often prominent, Greek life. As a private university, it operates under different legal considerations than Texas’s public institutions, which can impact hazing investigations and litigation for Coleman County families.

5.4.1 Campus & culture snapshot

SMU is a private, religiously affiliated university in Dallas, serving a diverse student body known for its academic achievements and active social life. Greek life is highly visible and influential, playing a significant role in many students’ experiences. SMU often attracts students from well-established Coleman County families and throughout Texas, who value its reputation and programs.

5.4.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

SMU strictly prohibits hazing, in accordance with Texas law. Their policy highlights that acts can be physical, mental, emotional, or psychological and specifically prohibits activities like forced alcohol consumption, sleep deprivation, and any form of humiliation or degradation. SMU encourages reporting through its Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards, the SMU Police Department, and through anonymous reporting hotlines.

5.4.3 Example incidents & response

SMU has had its share of hazing controversies:

  • In 2017, the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity was suspended following credible allegations of severe hazing that included paddling, forced alcohol consumption, and sleep deprivation. The chapter faced a multi-year suspension and was banned from recruiting new members for an extended period. This incident specifically highlighted the dangerous combination of physical and alcohol-related hazing, often camouflaged as “tradition.”
  • While SMU may not publish a public hazing log as detailed as UT’s, disciplinary actions like these are often made public through university announcements, demonstrating SMU’s commitment to addressing hazing.

5.4.4 How an SMU hazing case might proceed

As a private university, SMU does not benefit from sovereign immunity in the same way as public Texas universities. This can simplify some aspects of civil litigation, making it more straightforward to pursue direct claims against the university. Lawsuits would typically be filed in Dallas County courts. Criminal charges related to hazing incidents would involve the Dallas Police Department or Dallas County law enforcement, depending on the location of the offense. For Coleman County families, legal representation familiar with private university liability and Dallas court systems is essential.

5.4.5 What SMU students & parents should do

  • Coleman County families considering SMU should be aware of the robust Greek system and its associated risks.
  • Familiarize yourselves with SMU’s Student Code of Conduct and hazing policies.
  • Utilize SMU’s various reporting channels, including anonymous options like Real Response, if you suspect hazing.
  • Document diligently; internal university reports can be highly valuable in civil discovery, even if not publicly accessible.
  • If hazing occurs, promptly consult a lawyer experienced in private university hazing cases and Dallas County jurisdiction, as the legal framework can differ from public institutions.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Christian institution in Waco, has a distinct culture influenced by its religious affiliation. Its Greek life is present but operates within this unique context, and the university has faced scrutiny in the past regarding institutional oversight in student safety matters. Many Coleman County families seek out Baylor for its values-based education.

5.5.1 Campus & culture snapshot

Baylor University is the oldest continuously operating university in Texas. Located in Waco, it boasts a strong Christian mission and a close-knit campus community. Greek life and various student organizations are active, but they are expected to align with the university’s core values. For Coleman County families, Baylor’s academic reputation and faith-based environment are often key deciding factors.

5.5.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing, defining it in a manner consistent with Texas state law. Their policy emphasizes that engaging in hazing behavior subjects individuals and organizations to penalties ranging from suspension to expulsion. Baylor advocates for a “zero tolerance” approach and encourages reporting through the Department of Student Activities, the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD), and its confidential “EthicsPoint Hotline.”

5.5.3 Example incidents & response

Baylor’s history includes documented instances of hazing, even within its sports programs:

  • In 2020, the Baylor baseball team faced an internal investigation that led to the suspension of 14 players. The precise nature of the hazing was not fully disclosed, but the widespread disciplinary action underscored that hazing persists even in high-profile athletic programs at religiously affiliated schools. This incident highlighted the often-covert nature of hazing and the university’s capacity to take action when allegations are substantiated.
  • Baylor’s past challenges with institutional oversight, notably during its Title IX and sexual assault scandal, have created intense scrutiny of its broader student safety and disciplinary processes. This background means any hazing allegations are likely to be met with heightened public and internal attention.

5.5.4 How a Baylor hazing case might proceed

As a private institution, Baylor does not have sovereign immunity, making it a more direct defendant in civil lawsuits compared to public universities. Litigation would typically occur in McLennan County courts. The religious affiliation of Baylor could also be a factor in how cases are framed and defended, with an emphasis on its code of conduct and values. Criminal investigations would involve the Waco Police Department or McLennan County law enforcement. Coleman County families pursuing a case against Baylor would benefit from legal counsel experienced with private university conduct policies and the local legal environment.

5.5.5 What Baylor students & parents should do

  • Coleman County families whose children attend Baylor should thoroughly review the university’s Code of Conduct and hazing policies, particularly in light of its core values.
  • Utilize the confidential EthicsPoint Hotline for anonymous reports or contact BUPD for direct intervention.
  • Baylor’s strong community emphasizes reporting actions that violate its Christian principles; leverage this to encourage open communication about hazing.
  • Given Baylor’s previous experiences with institutional oversight, families should be prepared to engage with attorneys who can competently navigate both civil and, if necessary, criminal legal actions to ensure accountability.

FRATERNITIES & SORORITIES: CAMPUS-SPECIFIC + NATIONAL HISTORIES

For Coleman County families impacted by hazing, it is vital to understand that a local chapter’s actions are rarely isolated. They often reflect patterns of behavior seen across other chapters of the same national organization, and these patterns are critical to our legal strategies.

6.1 Why National Histories Matter

Most fraternities and sororities at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor are not independent entities; they are local chapters of much larger national organizations. These national bodies set policies, provide resources, collect dues, and are, significantly, aware of hazing incidents that occur across their vast networks of chapters.

  • Foreseeability: When a Texas chapter engages in a specific type of hazing (e.g., forced alcohol consumption on a “pledge night”) that has previously led to injury or death at another chapter in a different state, the national organization can be argued to have had “foreseeability.” This means they knew or should have known that such activities were dangerous and had a duty to prevent them.
  • Pattern Evidence: Our firm uses documented hazing incidents from universities across the country to demonstrate a repeated pattern of dangerous and often fatal behaviors within certain national fraternities. This shows that the national organization had prior notice of these risks.
  • Policy and Enforcement Gaps: National organizations frequently claim to have “zero-tolerance” anti-hazing policies. However, when a pattern of hazing persists, it suggests a failure in oversight, enforcement, or the training provided by the national body. This gap between written policy and actual practice strengthens negligence claims.

For Coleman County families, this means the fight against hazing isn’t just with a few local students; it often involves holding multi-million-dollar national organizations accountable for their systemic failures.

6.2 Organization Mapping: National Repetitive Practices

While we cannot list every single chapter at every Texas university, here are some of the national organizations with a presence in Texas that have well-documented hazing histories nationally and/or locally. This is not an exhaustive list nor an accusation against every chapter, but rather an illustration of the patterns we investigate.

  • Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): This fraternity has been involved in numerous hazing incidents, most notably the tragic death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University in 2021. Foltz died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume excessive alcohol. The Foltz family’s case resulted in a settlement of nearly $10 million from the national fraternity and the university. Another incident involving Pike was the 2012 death of David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University, also due to alcohol poisoning during a hazing event, which resulted in a $14 million settlement. If a Coleman County student encounters similar alcohol-related hazing methods at a Pike chapter in Texas, there’s a clear national pattern of dangerous conduct.
  • Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): Long labeled “America’s deadliest fraternity” by some media outlets, SAE has a history of alcohol-related hazing deaths. Beyond the national pattern, local Texas chapters have faced severe allegations. For example, the Texas A&M chapter faced a lawsuit around 2021 where pledges alleged being doused with industrial-strength cleaner, resulting in severe chemical burns. The University of Texas at Austin chapter was involved in the 2006 death of pledge Tyler Cross under alcohol-related circumstances. This consistent pattern across chapters underscores a national organizational challenge that could affect students from Coleman County.
  • Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): This fraternity was linked to the death of Maxwell “Max” Gruver at Louisiana State University in 2017, where pledges were forced into a fatal drinking game. The case resulted in criminal convictions and prompted Louisiana’s Max Gruver Act. In Texas, the national organization’s chapter at Texas A&M was involved in a hazing death in 2018 (Joseph Little) and at the University of Missouri in 2021 (Danny Santulli) which resulted in a multi-million dollar settlement. These incidents suggest a repeated national issue that Texas chapters, including those in schools where Coleman County families send their children, must be aware of.
  • Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): This fraternity has a documented hazing history nationally, including the 2017 alcohol poisoning death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University. Critically, Attorney911 is actively representing Leonel Bermudez in a $10 million lawsuit against the Pi Kappa Phi chapter at the University of Houston for severe hazing in late 2025 that led to acute kidney failure and rhabdomyolysis. This case directly connects the national organization’s patterns to a major Texas university near Coleman County.
  • Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): The organization was involved in the 2001 drowning death of Chad Meredith at the University of Miami, which resulted in a $12.6 million jury verdict based on hazing claims. In Texas, a Kappa Sigma incident at Texas Christian University in 2018 led to the arrest of a member for hazing, highlighting local concerns.
  • Kappa Alpha Order (KA): With a strong Southern tradition, this fraternity has faced hazing allegations at multiple campuses, including SMU (2017) and elsewhere nationally. A 1987 death at the University of Mississippi involving alcohol-related fall after a Big Brother-Little Brother party.
  • Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ): This historically Black fraternity has faced multiple civil allegations and criminal charges related to hazing nationally, including the 1997 Joseph Snell case at Bowie State University, where Snell endured severe beatings and burns, ultimately leading to a $375,000 verdict against the fraternity. More recently, a 2023 complaint alleged severe paddling and physical abuse at the University of Southern Mississippi. In Texas, their chapter at Lamar University was linked to a 1986 death. The Tennessee State University chapter in 1983 and 2001 had pledge deaths due to physical hazing and alcohol.

This pattern evidence is vital: it demonstrates that hazing is not merely student “horseplay” but often a predictable outcome of organizational culture and a failure to enforce policies. For Coleman County families, knowing this national history equips them with critical information for potential legal action.

BUILDING A CASE: EVIDENCE, DAMAGES, STRATEGY

For Coleman County families seeking accountability and compensation for hazing, building a robust legal case requires meticulous evidence collection, a deep understanding of applicable damages, and a sophisticated legal strategy. This is where Attorney911’s experience in complex litigation proves invaluable.

7.1 Evidence: The Foundation of a Strong Case

In an era of digital communication, hazing investigations have transformed. The evidence that can win a case today is often found in the very devices students use daily. Our firm systematically seeks out every available piece of information.

  • Digital Communications (Critical): This is often the goldmine of hazing evidence.

    • Group Messaging Apps: Platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Signal, Telegram, Discord, and fraternity-specific apps are where hazing is planned, executed, and discussed. Messages show coercion, specific instructions, intent, and cover-up attempts. Many Coleman County students use these platforms daily.
    • Text Messages & DMs: Direct messages between new members and older members often contain evidence of demands, threats, or instructions.
    • Social Media: Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and Facebook provide evidence of activities, humiliation, or forced participation, even if quickly disappearing.
    • Preservation Method: Attorney911 advises immediate and comprehensive screenshots of all relevant conversations, including timestamps and participant names. If messages are disappearing (e.g., Snapchat), screen recording is crucial. We work with digital forensics experts to recover deleted messages, but direct screenshots are always preferred. Our video, “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs), provides essential guidance on this.

  • Photos & Videos:

    • Content filmed by members during events, shared in group chats, or posted on social media.
    • Security camera footage from campus, private residences, or local businesses can corroborate events, show who was present, and highlight delays in seeking aid.
    • Injury photos (taken immediately and over time).

  • Internal Organization Documents: These can reveal official policies versus actual practice.

    • Pledge manuals, initiation scripts, or “traditions” lists.
    • Emails or texts from officers about pledge activities.
    • National anti-hazing policies and risk management guidelines, which can be contrasted with the chapter’s actual conduct to show a failure to enforce or supervise.

  • University Records: These provide insight into institutional knowledge and prior warnings.

    • Prior disciplinary records for the same chapter (previous hazing violations, probation, suspensions).
    • Campus police incident reports.
    • Title IX complaints (if applicable).
    • Publicly available “hazing violation” logs (as seen at UT Austin) are vital for showing patterns. Discovery in a lawsuit can compel production of internal university emails and documents related to the chapter.

  • Medical and Psychological Records: Crucial for documenting harm.

    • Emergency room and hospitalization records, toxicology reports (for alcohol/drug cases).
    • Lab results (e.g., creatine kinase levels for rhabdomyolysis, as seen in the Bermudez case at UH).
    • Therapy notes from psychologists or psychiatrists to document PTSD, depression, anxiety, or other mental health impacts, which are key for demonstrating emotional distress.

  • Witness Testimony: Accounts from individuals who saw the hazing firsthand or observed changes in the victim.

    • Other pledges, current members, former members (especially those who left due to hazing), roommates, RAs, coaches, or bystanders from Coleman County.

7.2 Damages: Seeking Full Compensation for Hazing’s Harm

Hazing can result in catastrophic injuries or death, and victims and their families are entitled to compensation for a wide range of harms. Our firm meticulously calculates these damages to ensure no aspect of suffering goes unaddressed, as outlined in our video, “How Much Is My Personal Injury Case Worth?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onBzdkIWadY).

  • Economic Damages (Quantifiable Financial Losses):

    • Medical Expenses: All past and future costs, from ambulance rides and ER visits to long-term physical therapy, psychiatric care, and, in severe cases like Leonel Bermudez’s (UH) or Danny Santulli’s (Missouri), a lifetime of medical care and adaptive living expenses.
    • Lost Income & Earning Capacity: Compensation for wages lost due to injury or withdrawal from school, and for future income lost if the hazing results in permanent disability or delays professional careers.
    • Educational Losses: Tuition, fees, and loss of scholarships due to leaving school or needing to transfer.

  • Non-Economic Damages (Subjective Losses):

    • Physical Pain and Suffering: Compensation for the actual pain endured from injuries and ongoing physical discomfort.
    • Emotional Distress: This encompasses the profound psychological impact of hazing, including PTSD, depression, anxiety, humiliation, and the long-term trauma of abuse. Psychological evaluations are key here.
    • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: When hazing prevents a student from participating in activities they once loved, limits social engagement, or fundamentally alters their college experience and future aspirations.

  • Wrongful Death Damages (For Families): In tragic death cases, such as the national precedents of Stone Foltz, Max Gruver, or Andrew Coffey, families can recover for:

  • Punitive Damages: In cases of egregious conduct, where defendants acted with malice, gross negligence, or reckless indifference (e.g., delaying 911 calls while a pledge is dying), courts may award punitive damages. These are designed to punish the wrongdoers and deter similar conduct in the future and are explicitly pursued by Attorney911 in cases like the Bermudez lawsuit.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Hazing litigation often involves powerful, well-resourced defendants, including national fraternities (which operate like multi-million-dollar corporations), universities, and their respective insurance carriers.

  • Insurance Companies: These entities typically provide liability coverage for national organizations, local chapters, and universities. However, they frequently attempt to deny coverage by claiming that hazing constitutes “intentional acts” or is expressly excluded from their policies.
  • Attorney911’s Advantage: Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) is a significant asset. She understands the “inside baseball” of how these insurance companies operate, their tactics for denying claims, exploiting policy loopholes, and delaying settlements. Our firm knows how to challenge unjust denials and build cases that compel insurers to honor their obligations.
  • Multiple Defendants: By suing all potentially liable parties—individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and universities—we maximize the chances of a favorable judgment or settlement. Each defendant may hold a piece of the liability and often, a separate insurance policy.

This multi-faceted approach to litigation, combining extensive evidence gathering with a deep understanding of damages and aggressive pursuit of all liable parties, is central to Attorney911’s strategy in every hazing case, especially for families in Coleman County.

PRACTICAL GUIDES & FAQS

For Coleman County parents and students, facing hazing can be overwhelming. Knowing what steps to take and what pitfalls to avoid is critical. Attorney911 provides these practical guides from years of experience in hazing litigation and crisis response.

8.1 For Parents: Navigating the Hazing Crisis

Parents are often the first to notice that something is wrong. Trust your instincts and equip yourself with information.

  • Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert to changes in your child’s behavior.

    • Physical Indicators: Unexplained bruises, cuts, or “accidental” injuries; extreme fatigue, severe sleep deprivation; sudden changes in eating habits or weight loss/gain.
    • Emotional/Behavioral Shifts: Increased anxiety, depression, irritability, or withdrawal from family and old friends; sudden secrecy about organizational activities (“I can’t talk about it”); a defensive posture when asked about the group; a sense of constant stress or dread.
    • Academic Decline: Unexplained drops in grades, missed classes, or a sudden disinterest in studies due to “mandatory” group activities.
    • Digital Obsession: Constant checking of phones for group chat messages, responding at all hours, or anxiety when their phone receives notifications.
    • “Just have to get through this”: Hearing phrases like this can often be a red flag for forced endurance.

  • How to Talk to Your Child: Choose a calm, private moment. Start with open-ended questions and emphasize their safety above all else.

    • “How are things really going with the [organization]? Are you enjoying it?”
    • “Is there anything that makes you uncomfortable or that you feel pressured to do?”
    • Reassure them: “My priority is your safety and well-being. There’s nothing you can say that will make me judge you.”
    • Emphasize that you will support them if they want to leave or report.

  • If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize their health and document everything.

    • Seek immediate medical care. Insist that the medical provider documents how the injury occurred, noting any hazing allegations.
    • Document everything: Take high-resolution photos of any injuries immediately and over subsequent days. Note dates, times, and what your child shares. Screenshot relevant text messages or social media posts immediately as well. Check our video “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs).
    • Save any physical evidence, such as damaged clothing or objects.

  • Dealing with the University: Document all interactions.

    • Keep detailed records of every phone call, email, and meeting with university officials. Ask for information in writing.
    • Inquire specifically about the organization’s prior disciplinary history, including any previous hazing violations or sanctions. In Texas, you can do this through public records requests for state universities.

  • When to Talk to a Lawyer: Don’t delay.

    • If your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm.
    • If you feel the university or organization is minimizing the incident, covering it up, or not taking your concerns seriously.
    • If you need help preserving evidence, understanding options, or protecting your child from retaliation.

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

For Coleman County students navigating Greek life or other organizations, understanding your rights and how to stay safe is paramount.

  • Is This Hazing or Just “Tradition”? A Decision Guide: Ask yourself these questions:

    • Am I being forced or pressured to do something against my will, without a genuine choice?
    • Would I behave this way if my parents, professors, or the university president were watching?
    • Does this activity involve alcohol/drugs, physical pain, humiliation, or secrecy?
    • Does this activity interfere with my academics, sleep, or personal well-being?
    • Am I being told to lie or keep “secrets” from people outside the organization?
    • Am I doing things older members don’t have to do?
    • If you answered YES to any of these, it’s likely hazing. Remember that under Texas law, your “consent” doesn’t make it legal or safe.

  • Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the right to leave at any time.

    • If you are in immediate danger: Leave the situation immediately. Call 911, call a trusted friend or family member, or call the National Anti-Hazing Hotline at 1-888-NOT-HAZE.
    • To de-pledge: Send a clear, written message (email or text) to the chapter president or new member educator stating your resignation. Do not go to “one last meeting” alone, as this can be an opportunity for further pressure or intimidation.
    • Protection from Retaliation: Document any threats or harassment you receive after reporting or leaving. Report such behaviors to the Dean of Students or campus police; local police can also assist with stalking or harassment.

  • Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Texas law encourages calling for help. You cannot be punished by the university for calling 911 or seeking medical help in an emergency, even if underage drinking or other minor policy violations were involved. Your safety is the priority.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses: Breaking the Silence

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

  • Your Impact: Your testimony and any evidence you possess could be the key to stopping hazing and preventing another tragedy in Coleman County or elsewhere.
  • Protection for Reporters: Texas law (Education Code § 37.154) grants immunity from civil or criminal liability for individuals who report hazing in good faith.
  • Seeking Counsel: If you fear personal legal exposure (e.g., for past participation), consult an attorney confidentially before speaking to university officials or law enforcement. Attorneys can advise you on your rights and help navigate the process. Attorney911 handles criminal defense implications too, for which you can check here for more information: https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For Coleman County families, knowing these common pitfalls is vital for preserving the integrity of a potential hazing claim. Our video, “Client Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Injury Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY), further details these critical errors.

  1. Deleting Evidence: The most common mistake. Parents and students, fearing “more trouble,” delete group chats, photos, or social media posts related to hazing. This can destroy crucial evidence. Instead: Preserve everything, even if it seems embarrassing. Our lawyers can help filter what’s relevant.
  2. Confronting the Organization Directly: An angry parent’s natural instinct is to confront the fraternity or university directly. This almost always backfires. Instead: Document first, then call a lawyer. Direct confrontation gives the perpetrators and institutions time to unify stories and destroy evidence.
  3. Signing Waivers or Releases from the University: Universities may offer “internal resolutions” or ask you to sign documents. These often waive your rights to sue for damages. Instead: Never sign anything from the university or insurance companies without having an experienced attorney review it.
  4. Posting Details on Social Media: While seeking support is natural, publicly detailing an ongoing hazing situation or potential lawsuit can compromise your case. Defense attorneys screenshot everything to look for inconsistencies. Instead: Document privately. Allow your attorney to control the narrative and timing of public statements.
  5. Delaying Legal Consultation: Hazing evidence is ephemeral—group chats get deleted, witnesses graduate, and memories fade. The statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death cases in Texas is generally two years (for more, watch “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c). Instead: Contact Attorney911 immediately to preserve evidence and begin an investigation.
  6. Trusting the University’s “Internal Investigation” Solely: While university investigations are necessary, they often prioritize the institution’s reputation over the victim’s full compensation. Instead: Recognize that a university’s process is usually separate from your civil legal rights.
  7. Speaking to Insurance Adjusters Without Counsel: Insurance companies, representing the fraternity or university, might contact you “just to get your side of the story.” They are gathering information that can be used against you. Instead: Politely decline to speak and state, “My attorney will contact you.”

8.5 Short FAQ

  • “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
    Yes, under specific circumstances. Public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, UT) benefit from sovereign immunity, making direct claims difficult but not impossible. Exceptions exist for gross negligence, Title IX violations, or when individual university employees act with willful negligence. Private universities (SMU, Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections. The specifics of your case matter, so contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case review.

  • “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
    Yes, it can be. While basic hazing is a Class B misdemeanor, it becomes a state jail felony under Texas law if it results in serious bodily injury or death. Those who fail to report hazing or retaliate against those who do can also face misdemeanor charges.

  • “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
    Absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts recognize that the power dynamics, peer pressure, and fear of exclusion inherent in hazing environments mean “consent” is rarely truly voluntary.

  • “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
    Generally, there’s a two-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death in Texas. However, certain factors, like delayed discovery of harm or fraudulent concealment of information, can extend this period. It is crucial to act quickly, as evidence can disappear rapidly. For more on this, watch our video: “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c).

  • “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
    The location of the hazing does not automatically eliminate liability. Universities and national organizations can still be held responsible if they had knowledge, sponsored the event, or should have foreseen the risk. Many major hazing cases nationally have involved off-campus incidents.

  • “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
    Most hazing cases settle confidentially, often before going to trial. Our firm prioritizes your family’s privacy and works to ensure that sensitive details remain private while still pursuing justice and accountability.

ABOUT THE MANGINELLO LAW FIRM + CALL TO ACTION

When your family faces the profound trauma of hazing, you need more than a compassionate ear; you need skilled, aggressive legal representation that deeply understands the intricate landscape of a unique type of injury. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. This is where The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, stands apart as the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

We operate from our primary office in Houston, extending our services to Austin, Beaumont, and throughout Texas, including families in Coleman County. Our firm has seen firsthand how hazing can shatter lives and understand that Coleman County families, like those across the state, deserve answers and accountability.

Why Attorney911 for Hazing Cases

Our firm brings a unique blend of qualifications specifically tailored to the complexities of hazing litigation:

  • Insurance Insider Advantage with Lupe Peña: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), previously spent years as an insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She understands precisely how the multi-million-dollar insurance carriers for national fraternities and universities evaluate, undervalue, and attempt to deny hazing claims. Lupe knows their internal playbooks, their delay tactics, their arguments for coverage exclusions, and how they approach settlement negotiations—because she used to run that playbook against plaintiffs. This insider knowledge gives our clients a distinct strategic advantage.

  • Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions with Ralph Manginello: Ralph Manginello, our managing partner (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/), has a proven track record of successfully litigating against formidable corporate defendants. Our firm was one of the few Texas plaintiffs’ firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, taking on billion-dollar corporations in federal court and achieving significant results. This extensive experience means we are not intimidated by national fraternities, large university legal teams, or their high-powered defense counsel. We know how to build a case, conduct exhaustive discovery, and confront powerful defendants who believe they cannot be held accountable.

  • Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: Our firm has secured multi-million dollar results in cases involving wrongful death (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/) and catastrophic injuries. We understand how to work with economists, life care planners, and medical specialists to accurately value the devastating, long-term impact of hazing—whether it’s acute kidney failure due to rhabdomyolysis (as in our active University of Houston case), permanent brain damage, or tragic loss of life. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force genuine accountability and secure the maximum compensation for our clients’ future needs.

  • Dual Criminal and Civil Hazing Expertise: Hazing often involves both criminal and civil components. Ralph Manginello actively participates in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA), giving our firm a unique perspective on how criminal charges intersect with civil lawsuits. This means we can provide comprehensive advice on potential criminal exposure for individuals involved in hazing, while simultaneously pursuing civil justice for the victim. We can advise clients on their rights both in criminal investigations and civil depositions, ensuring a cohesive and strong legal strategy.

  • Investigative Depth and Modern Evidence Collection: We understand that hazing cases are won or lost on evidence. Our team leverages cutting-edge digital forensics to uncover deleted group chats, social media posts, and other hidden electronic evidence. We meticulously pursue university records, national fraternity files, witness testimony, and medical documentation. We investigate with the dedication that your child’s life and future depend on it—because they do. Our firm knows how to expose the hidden practices, cover-ups, and systemic failures that allow hazing to persist.

We approach every case with profound empathy and a fierce commitment to advocacy. We know that this is one of the hardest things a family can face, particularly so for families in Coleman County who often feel isolated from the major university hubs. Our job is to get you answers, hold all responsible parties accountable, and work tirelessly to prevent this from happening to another family. We fight for thorough investigations and real accountability, not just quick settlements. We understand that hazing at Texas universities impacts families in Coleman County and communities across the region, and we are here to offer our expertise.

Call to Action for Coleman County Families

If you or your child has experienced hazing at any Texas campus—whether at the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor, or any other institution—you deserve answers and accountability. Families in Coleman County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to seek justice.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We will listen empathetically to your story, review what happened without judgment, explain your legal options under Texas law, and help you determine the best path forward.

What to expect in your free consultation:

  • We’ll listen to your story without judgment.
  • We’ll review any evidence you’ve gathered (photos, texts, medical records) and advise on further preservation.
  • We’ll explain your potential legal options: reporting to law enforcement, pursuing a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
  • We’ll discuss realistic timelines and what a legal process might entail.
  • We’ll answer your questions about attorney fees; we work on a contingency basis, meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case (learn more about contingency fees here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc).
  • There is no pressure to hire us on the spot—take the time you need to decide. Everything you discuss with us is confidential.

You don’t have to face this alone. Hazing victims and their families often feel isolated, but Attorney911 is here to be your advocate.

Contact Attorney911 today:

Hablamos Español: For Spanish-speaking families, please contact Lupe Peña directly at lupe@atty911.com for consultation services in Spanish. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

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

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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