The Delaware Hazing Crisis: A Comprehensive Guide for Families

A late-night call breaks the quiet of your Delaware home. Your child, a bright student attending a Texas university, is in the emergency room. They’re disoriented, bruised, and suffering from acute kidney failure. The story slowly unfolds: forced physical activity, degrading rituals, and coercive drinking games, all part of “initiation week” for a fraternity they desperately wanted to join. It’s a parent’s worst nightmare, a far cry from the college experience you envisioned.

This scenario isn’t plucked from fiction. It’s a stark reality for families across the nation, and right here in Delaware, whose children attend colleges throughout Texas. The University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor are just some of the prominent institutions where such incidents have tragically unfolded. As the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, we at Attorney911 understand the profound shock and helplessness that follow such events. We believe that informed parents and students are the first line of defense against hazing.

This comprehensive guide serves as an essential resource for families in Delaware and across Texas. We will delve into:

• What modern hazing truly entails, dispelling outdated stereotypes.
• The intricate legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas, including both criminal and civil avenues.
• The pressing lessons learned from major national hazing cases and their direct relevance to students attending schools like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor.
• How the dark histories of national fraternities and sororities, coupled with local chapter behaviors, create a tragic blueprint for liability.
• The legal options available to victims and their families in Delaware and throughout Texas.

Please remember that this article provides general information and is not specific legal advice. Every case is unique, and while we offer broad guidance, it cannot substitute for a personalized consultation. Our firm, Attorney911, is dedicated to evaluating individual cases based on their specific facts and serving families across Texas, including those in Delaware.

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).

• If your child sustained injuries, ensure medical professionals document the cause in their records as potentially hazing-related.

• 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 without legal counsel.
  • Post details on public social media before consulting an attorney.
  • 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 Delaware families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or collegiate organizations, hazing often conjures images from old movies—a silly prank or a bit of harmless fun. Unfortunately, the reality in 2025 is far grimmer. Hazing is a dangerous, often brutal, practice that continues to devastate lives and families. It has evolved beyond simple pranks into a complex web of physical, psychological, and digital abuse, leveraging technology and social pressure to maintain secrecy and control.

Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

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 is crucial because it highlights several key elements:

• Coercion, not consent: The idea that “I agreed to it” does not automatically legitimize the act or make it safe or legal. When immense peer pressure, power imbalances, and social consequences are at play, true, voluntary consent is often impossible. The fear of exclusion, the desire for belonging, and the pressure from older members can compel individuals to participate in activities they would never otherwise choose.
• Purpose for affiliation: The act must be connected to initiation into, affiliation with, or maintaining membership in an organization. This distinguishes hazing from general bullying or prank-playing.
• Endangerment: The act must endanger the physical health, mental health, or safety of the student. This can range from direct physical harm to severe psychological distress.
• Humiliation or exploitation: Hazing often involves acts designed to degrade, demean, or take advantage of new members.

Main Categories of Hazing

Modern hazing manifests in various insidious forms. We classify these into several key categories to shed light on the breadth of this harmful practice:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains one of the most common and deadly forms of hazing. It involves forcing or pressuring new members to consume alcohol or other substances, often in dangerous quantities or combinations.

  • Forced or coerced drinking: Pledges may be compelled to drink beyond their limits.
  • Chugging challenges, “lineups,” or drinking games: These are often designed to ensure rapid and excessive consumption.
  • “Bottle exchanges” or “Big/Little” drinking nights: New members are gifted bottles of liquor with the expectation of immediate, heavy consumption.
  • Pressure to consume unknown or mixed substances: This can lead to unpredictable and life-threatening reactions.

• Physical Hazing: This category involves activities that inflict physical discomfort, pain, or injury.

  • Paddling and beatings: Direct physical assault.
  • Extreme calisthenics, “workouts,” or “smokings”: Prolonged, strenuous physical exertion far beyond safe limits, often used as punishment.
  • Sleep deprivation: Forced late-night activities and early morning wake-ups, leading to extreme fatigue.
  • Food/water deprivation: Restricting access to basic necessities or forcing consumption of unpleasant substances.
  • Exposure to extreme elements: Leaving new members outdoors in severe cold or heat without proper attire or shelter.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These acts are designed to degrade, embarrass, and often involve sexual themes.

  • Forced nudity or partial nudity: Compelling new members to expose themselves.
  • Simulated sexual acts: Forcing participants into sexually explicit or degrading poses and activities such as “roasted pig” or “elephant walk.”
  • Degrading costumes: Requiring new members to wear embarrassing or sexually suggestive outfits in public.
  • Acts with racial, homophobic, or sexist overtones: Using slurs, stereotypes, or forcing individuals to perform degrading acts based on their identity.

• Psychological Hazing: This type of hazing inflicts emotional and mental distress, often leaving lasting trauma.

  • Verbal abuse, threats, and intimidation: Constant yelling, insults, and threats of social or physical harm.
  • Social isolation: Forbidding new members from interacting with non-group members or even other pledges.
  • Manipulation or forced confessions: Coercing individuals to reveal personal information or secrets.
  • Public shaming: Humiliating individuals in front of others, whether in person or online.

• Digital/Online Hazing: With the pervasive use of technology, hazing has found new, insidious avenues.

  • Group chat dares and “challenges”: Pledges are often required to respond instantly to group messages at all hours, perform specific tasks, or face consequences.
  • Public humiliation via social media: Forcing individuals to post embarrassing content on platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, or Discord.
  • Pressure to create or share compromising images/videos: These can be used for blackmail or further humiliation.
  • Exploitation of location services: Requiring pledges to share their live location via apps like Find My Friends to track their whereabouts and ensure compliance.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception among Delaware families that hazing is limited to “frat boys.” However, contemporary hazing is an issue that transcends group types and campus boundaries. It is pervasive and often rooted in culture, tradition, and a misguided sense of loyalty:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes social Greek letter organizations across all councils (Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council, and multicultural Greek councils). They are frequently at the forefront of hazing discussions, but they are far from the only perpetrators.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: These organizations, with their emphasis on discipline and hierarchy, can sometimes foster environments where “toughness” devolves into hazing.
• Athletic Teams: From high school to collegiate levels, sports teams across all disciplines (football, basketball, baseball, track and field, cheerleading, club sports, etc.) have been implicated in hazing rituals.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign groups like marching bands, theater troupes, or dance teams can sometimes engage in hazing under the guise of “team bonding” or “building character.”
• Spirit Squads and Tradition Clubs: Organizations dedicated to upholding school traditions can sometimes require new members to partake in dangerous or humiliating rituals in the name of loyalty.
• Other Student Organizations: Some academic honor societies, service clubs, and cultural associations have also faced accusations of hazing.

Regardless of the group, hazing persists because of several underlying factors: the allure of social status, the desire to preserve “tradition,” the intense pressure to conform, and a pervasive culture of secrecy and silence that protects perpetrators. For Delaware families, understanding the diverse settings in which hazing can occur is critical to protecting their children.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

For families in Delaware navigating the complexities of a hazing incident in Texas, understanding the legal framework is paramount. Under Texas law—which governs cases in Delaware—hazing is unlawful and carries significant consequences. This section clarifies the legal landscape, distinguishing between criminal and civil actions, and highlighting the various entities that can be held liable.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has clear and specific anti-hazing provisions outlined in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. These laws aim to protect students from harmful initiation practices and hold individuals and organizations accountable.

Hazing is broadly defined as: “any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student, that: (1) endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student; and (2) occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members are students.”

Key aspects of the Texas hazing statute:

• Scope: It applies to acts occurring both on-campus and off-campus, meaning the physical location of the hazing does not shield perpetrators or organizations from liability.
• Nature of harm: Hazing encompasses acts that endanger either physical health or safety (such as beatings, forced calisthenics, coerced consumption of alcohol or drugs) or mental health or safety (like extreme humiliation, intimidation, or psychological manipulation).
• Intent: The act must be “intentional, knowing, or reckless.” This means that perpetrators don’t necessarily have to intend to cause severe harm; merely acting recklessly, knowing the potential for danger, is sufficient for a violation.
• “Consent is not a defense”: Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that a student’s “consent” to hazing is not a valid legal defense. This is a critical provision that recognizes the coercive nature of hazing and the power imbalance inherent in such situations.

Criminal penalties:

• Class B Misdemeanor: Most hazing offenses, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury.
• State Jail Felony: If the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. This is a critical provision, transforming severe hazing into a felony offense.
• Failing to Report: Any student or faculty member who has firsthand knowledge of a hazing incident and fails to report it to appropriate authorities can also face misdemeanor charges.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

When a hazing incident occurs, there are typically two distinct legal avenues that may be pursued:

• Criminal Cases:

  • These cases are initiated and prosecuted by the state (through a district attorney or prosecutor).
  • Their primary goal is punishment of the individual perpetrators, which can include incarceration, fines, and probation.
  • Hazing-related criminal charges can include the hazing offense itself, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, drug offenses, or, in the most tragic circumstances, manslaughter or negligent homicide.
  • The state must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

• Civil Cases:

  • These cases are initiated by the victims (the hazed student) or their surviving family members (in cases of wrongful death).
  • Their primary goal is monetary compensation for the harm suffered and to hold responsible parties (individuals, organizations, universities) accountable.
  • Civil claims often focus on theories of negligence, gross negligence, wrongful death, negligent supervision, premises liability, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
  • The plaintiff must prove their case by a “preponderance of the evidence,” a lower standard than criminal cases.

It is important for Delaware families to understand that criminal and civil cases can proceed independently or simultaneously. A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for pursuing a civil lawsuit, and vice-versa.

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

In addition to state laws, several federal regulations and acts can impact how hazing incidents are addressed, particularly in institutions receiving federal funding:

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This significant federal legislation mandates that colleges and universities receiving federal aid must:

  • Transparently report hazing incidents and related disciplinary actions to the public.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention programs.
  • Maintain and disclose public data on hazing violations. These requirements will be phased in, with full implementation expected by 2026. This act aims to increase transparency and accountability nationwide.

• Title IX: This federal law prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. If hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based violence, or discrimination, it can trigger Title IX obligations, requiring universities to investigate and take action. This is particularly relevant in cases involving degrading sexualized rituals.

• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. Hazing incidents involving assaults, alcohol or drug violations, or other reportable offenses must be included in the institution’s annual security report, providing transparency about campus safety.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Obtaining justice and compensation in a civil hazing lawsuit involves identifying all potentially liable parties. The responsibility for hazing can extend far beyond just the individual perpetrators:

• Individual Students:

  • This includes students who directly inflicted harm, pressured others to participate, provided prohibited substances, or actively contributed to a dangerous environment.
  • This can also include student leaders who organized or oversaw hazing activities.

• Local Chapter / Organization:

  • The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself can be sued if it authorized, encouraged, or tolerated the hazing.
  • This is particularly true if the organization’s officers or official representatives were aware of the hazing and failed to intervene or report it.

• National Fraternity/Sorority Organization:

  • Many hazing victims and their families also pursue claims against the national parent organizations. National headquarters are typically responsible for setting policies, overseeing local chapters, providing training, and enforcing anti-hazing rules.
  • Liability can arise if the national organization had prior knowledge of hazing at the local chapter or other chapters, a pattern of similar incidents, or failed to adequately supervise the local chapter.

• University or Governing Board:

  • Colleges and universities can be held liable under various theories, primarily negligence. This includes negligent supervision, failure to enforce policies, failure to warn, or creating an environment where hazing was foreseeable.
  • Public universities in Texas, such as UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin, often assert sovereign immunity. However, exceptions exist for cases of gross negligence, when duties are ministerial (rather than discretionary), or when federal laws like Title IX are violated. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer sovereign immunity protections. Lawsuits against universities often seek to compel systemic changes in hazing prevention and enforcement.

• Third Parties:

  • Property Owners/Landlords: If hazing occurred at an off-campus house, apartment, or venue, the property owner or landlord could potentially be held liable if they knew or should have known about dangerous activities occurring on their property.
  • Alcohol Providers: Businesses that illegally sell or furnish alcohol to minors who then cause injury due to intoxication can be liable under “dram shop” laws.
  • Security Companies/Event Organizers: Any third parties responsible for safety or oversight at a hazing event venue.

Every case is fact-specific, and the precise combination of liable parties will depend on the unique circumstances and available evidence. An experienced hazing attorney understands how to meticulously investigate, identify all potential defendants, and navigate these complex liability frameworks.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragic reality of hazing is underscored by a sobering pattern of severe injuries and deaths across the nation. These national cases are not isolated incidents; they represent a recurring script of abuse, often fueled by toxic traditions, alcohol, and a conspiracy of silence. For Delaware families, understanding these precedents is crucial because they reveal the inherent dangers of hazing and the legal responsibility that falls upon institutions and organizations. The lessons learned from these cases directly inform strategies for accountability in Texas.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The vast majority of hazing-related deaths are attributed to acute alcohol poisoning, often as a result of forced or coerced binge drinking.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries after a “bid acceptance” initiation night. He was forced to consume excessive amounts of alcohol and then fell multiple times down a flight of stairs, injuries captured on the fraternity’s security cameras. Fraternity members delayed calling for medical help for nearly 12 hours. This case resulted in dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, comprehensive civil litigation, and it led to the creation of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. The Beta Theta Pi chapter was permanently banned from Penn State. This tragic incident underscores how extreme intoxication, a callous disregard for human life, and a culture of silence can converge with devastating, legally damning consequences.

• 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” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and were pressured to consume them quickly. Multiple fraternity members were prosecuted, and FSU temporarily suspended all Greek life activities in response. The Coffey family later filed a wrongful death suit, the details of which remain confidential. This incident highlights how supposedly innocent “bottle exchange” or “Big Brother/Little Brother” nights can quickly become deadly rituals, a recurring script for disaster.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game at the Phi Delta Theta house. Pledges were forced to drink heavily whenever they answered questions incorrectly. Max’s blood alcohol content was a fatal 0.495%. His death led to the enactment of the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana, a felony hazing law. Multiple members faced criminal charges, with one ultimately convicted of negligent homicide. The Gruver family settled their civil lawsuits for a confidential amount, later obtaining a $6.1 million verdict against individuals. This case powerfully demonstrates how public outrage and clear evidence can lead to significant legislative change and judicial accountability.

• 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 40-ounce bottle of alcohol during a “Big/Little” pledge event. Following his death, multiple fraternity members were convicted of various hazing-related charges, including misdemeanor hazing and reckless homicide. The Foltz family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with approximately $7 million coming from the Pi Kappa Alpha national fraternity and nearly $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This landmark settlement underscores the severe financial and reputational consequences for both national organizations and universities when hazing leads to death.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, hazing often involves brutal physical rituals and psychological torment, sometimes intended to “break down” pledges.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died after participating in a brutal “glass ceiling” ritual at an off-campus retreat in the Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania. Blindfolded and weighted with a heavy backpack, he was repeatedly tackled by fraternity members. Help was intentionally delayed for hours, leading to his death from a traumatic brain injury. This case was particularly significant because not only were individual members convicted, but the national Pi Delta Psi fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, and subsequently banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years and fined over $110,000. It serves as a stark reminder that off-campus locations offer no immunity, and national organizations can be held criminally liable for their chapters’ actions.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not confined to Greek life; it is also a pervasive issue within athletic programs, often disguised as “team bonding” or “character building.”

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In a scandal that rocked collegiate athletics, former Northwestern football players alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. This included forced sexual acts, racial discrimination, and other abusive rituals. Multiple players filed lawsuits against Northwestern and various coaching staff. The head coach, Pat Fitzgerald, was fired, leading to his own multi-million dollar wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university, which was confidentially settled in August 2025. This series of events powerfully demonstrated that hazing can permeate major athletic programs, raising critical questions about institutional oversight and the deep-seated cultural issues within high-profile sports.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies are not distant headlines; they represent a recurring, dangerous script that can and does play out on campuses across Texas, including those where Delaware families send their children. The common threads linking these cases are chilling: forced drinking, physical or psychological torment, humiliation, a blatant disregard for medical safety, and systematic cover-ups.

The patterns from these cases create a strong basis for legal action in Texas. When a national fraternity or university knew, or should have known, about these types of hazing incidents—either within the same chapter or across other chapters—it strengthens claims of foreseeability and negligence. These lessons directly inform how we pursue accountability for families in Delaware whose children may be subjected to hazing at schools like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor. While reform and multi-million-dollar settlements often follow only after immense tragedy and dedicated legal action, the fight for justice is a critical step towards protecting future generations.

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

For Delaware families, understanding the unique cultures, policies, and hazing histories of specific Texas universities is crucial. While hazing is a nationwide problem, its manifestation and institutional responses often vary by campus. This section provides a detailed look at five prominent Texas universities, including how their environments may foster hazing and where a legal case might focus, with particular relevance to Delaware families, many of whom send their children to these institutions.

Many Delaware families send their children to these premier Texas universities, or their alumni reside in Delaware. Thus, the legal and cultural landscapes of these institutions are of direct concern to our community.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus in the heart of Houston, Texas, serves a diverse student body, including many who hail from or have connections to the Delaware area. While UH fosters a dynamic academic environment, its active Greek life and numerous student organizations mean that hazing remains a serious concern for Houston parents and those in Delaware alike. Cases arising from UH incidents might proceed through courts in Harris County.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Houston is a sprawling urban campus known for its innovative research, diverse student population, and robust academic programs. With a blend of residential and commuter students, the campus buzzes with activity. Greek life at UH is particularly vibrant, encompassing a wide array of fraternities and sororities from various councils, including the Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and several multicultural Greek organizations. Beyond Greek life, UH boasts a multitude of student organizations, sports clubs, and cultural associations, each contributing to the rich tapestry of campus life.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, clearly stating that hazing is prohibited whether it occurs on-campus or off-campus. This policy explicitly forbids activities such as forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, mental distress, and any other acts that endanger the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation or affiliation.

UH provides multiple avenues for reporting hazing incidents, including:

• The Dean of Students Office.
• The Office of Student Conduct.
• The University of Houston Police Department (UHPD).
• Online reporting forms available on the university’s website.

UH also typically posts a general hazing statement along with information regarding disciplinary actions taken against organizations found responsible for hazing.

5.1.3 Example Incident & Response

One notable incident that highlights the dangers of hazing at UH involved the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity in 2016. Pledges were allegedly subjected to physical abuse, sleep deprivation, and extreme exercise, leading to serious injuries. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being violently slammed onto a surface during a hazing ritual. This incident resulted in misdemeanor hazing charges against individuals and the suspension of the chapter by the university. While UH’s publicly available disciplinary records may not be as detailed as some other Texas universities, records do reflect the university’s willingness to suspend chapters and impose other sanctions for violations of its anti-hazing policies, which often involve alcohol misuse and conduct “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort.”

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a hazing incident occurring at the University of Houston, jurisdiction would typically fall to the courts in Houston/Harris County, Texas. Depending on the nature and location of the incident, both the UH Police Department and the Houston Police Department could be involved in criminal investigations.

Civil lawsuits stemming from a UH hazing incident could potentially name a wide range of defendants, including:

• The individual students directly involved in the hazing.
• The local fraternity or sorority chapter (if it’s a separately organized legal entity).
• The national fraternity or sorority organization.
• Potentially the University of Houston itself, along with the UH System Board of Regents, particularly if there is evidence of negligent supervision or a failure to enforce policies.
• Owners of off-campus properties where hazing occurred.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents connected to the University of Houston, proactive measures and swift action are essential:

• Understand the Policy: Familiarize yourself with UH’s anti-hazing policy and reporting mechanisms.
• Document Everything: If hazing is suspected, immediately document any evidence—photos, videos, group chats, timestamps, and detailed notes on incidents. Digital communication is key documentation.
• Report Concerns: Utilize UH’s reporting channels (Dean of Students, UHPD). Remember that timely reporting can trigger investigations.
• Seek Medical Attention: Prioritize health. If injuries occur, seek immediate medical care and ensure the cause (hazing) is clearly documented.
• Contact a Houston-Based Hazing Lawyer: An attorney experienced in Houston-based hazing cases can help navigate the city’s complex legal landscape. They can uncover prior disciplinary actions against organizations at UH and provide crucial legal guidance through what can be an intimidating process.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a storied institution in College Station, holds significant appeal for many Delaware families seeking a traditional college experience. However, its deeply ingrained traditions, including a powerful Corps of Cadets and a robust Greek life, unfortunately, have also been associated with hazing incidents. Families right here in College Station, as well as those in Delaware, need to be aware of the specific challenges at A&M. Cases originating from A&M would typically fall under the jurisdiction of courts in Bryan/Brazos County.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M University, situated in College Station, is renowned for its rich traditions, strong military heritage through the Corps of Cadets, and fiercely loyal alumni network. The campus prides itself on a culture of respect, discipline, and camaraderie. The Corps of Cadets is a distinctive aspect of A&M, shaping a significant portion of student life with its military-style environment and emphasis on leadership. Beyond the Corps, Texas A&M also boasts a large and active Greek life community, representing numerous national fraternities and sororities. The university’s spirit organizations and athletic teams are equally prominent, all contributing to a vibrant, albeit sometimes intense, campus culture.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M University maintains a clear and comprehensive anti-hazing policy, reiterating the state’s prohibition against hazing activities. The university’s policy extends to all recognized student organizations, including Greek life and the Corps of Cadets, and applies to incidents both on and off campus. The policy strictly forbids any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation, affiliation, or membership.

Reporting channels at Texas A&M include:

• The Division of Student Affairs.
• The Office of Student Conduct.
• The University Police Department (UPD).
• Specific reporting protocols within the Corps of Cadets structure.
• Anonymous reporting options are also available online.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced multiple hazing allegations and incidents over the years, spanning both Greek life and the Corps of Cadets:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit (~2021): In a deeply disturbing incident, two pledges of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity alleged they were subjected to brutal hazing that involved being covered in substances including an industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in severe chemical burns that required extensive medical treatment, including skin graft surgeries. The fraternity chapter was suspended by the university, and the pledges subsequently filed a lawsuit seeking substantial damages. This case highlights the dangerous and degrading nature of modern hazing rituals.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging severe and degrading hazing within the Corps. The allegations included being forced to engage in simulated sexual acts and being bound in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million in damages, drawing national attention to hazing risks within military-style programs. Texas A&M responded by stating the matter was handled internally according to its established regulations.
• Aggie Bonfire Collapse (1999): While not traditional hazing, the tragic collapse of the Aggie Bonfire, killing 12 and injuring 27, raised critical questions about student-led high-risk activities and institutional oversight in the context of campus traditions. This event, though decades old, remains a powerful example of the potential for severe consequences when traditional student activities lack adequate supervision and safety protocols.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases originating from Texas A&M University typically fall under the jurisdiction of courts in Bryan/Brazos County. Both the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) and Bryan/College Station law enforcement would be involved in criminal investigations, depending on the nature and location of the hazing.

Potential defendants in a civil lawsuit could include:

• Individual students who perpetrated or facilitated the hazing.
• The local chapter of the fraternity or sorority.
• The national Greek organization.
• Relevant university entities, including Texas A&M University and the Texas A&M University System Board of Regents, particularly where claims of negligent supervision, failure to warn, or failure to enforce anti-hazing policies can be established.
• In Corps-related incidents, specific Corps leadership or university officials might be named.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents connected to Texas A&M, particularly those from Delaware, vigilance and prompt action are key:

• Understand “Tradition” vs. Hazing: Distinguish between genuine traditions and activities that cross the line into hazing, regardless of how they are framed by current members.
• Report Internally if Safe: Utilize Texas A&M’s reporting mechanisms within the Code of Conduct or Corps of Cadets.
• Preserve Evidence: Secure all digital and physical evidence immediately—screenshots of any communications, photos of injuries or events, and detailed personal notes.
• Seek Medical Care: Address any physical or psychological harm promptly, ensuring medical records document the suspected hazing as the cause.
• Consult an Experienced Hazing Attorney: Given A&M’s size and the unique aspects of the Corps of Cadets, a lawyer experienced in Texas hazing cases can provide invaluable guidance, helping to identify prior incidents, navigate university bureaucracy, and determine legal options.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is a flagship institution for many ambitious students, including those from Delaware seeking a world-class education. Its storied traditions and vibrant Greek life, however, also come with their own set of challenges, particularly concerning hazing. UT has, in some respects, led the way in terms of publicly reporting hazing incidents, offering both transparency and a stark reminder of ongoing issues. A hazing case at UT would generally be pursued in Travis County courts.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin stands as a beacon of academic excellence and passionate school spirit, drawing students from across Texas, the nation, and the world—including many from our Delaware community. Its campus culture is defined by iconic traditions like the “Hook ’em Horns” hand sign, fervent support for its athletic teams, and a sprawling student body actively engaged in numerous organizations. Greek life at UT is extensive, with a large presence of fraternities and sororities from various national councils. Beyond Greek organizations, UT also hosts numerous long-standing spirit organizations, academic clubs, and cultural associations, many of which have their own deeply rooted traditions.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas at Austin maintains a clear and uncompromising anti-hazing policy, explicitly prohibiting any hazing activity both on and off campus. This policy is consistent with Texas state law and emphasizes the university’s commitment to student safety and well-being. It defines hazing broadly to include any act that causes or is likely to cause physical or mental harm for the purpose of initiation or affiliation.

UT provides comprehensive reporting channels for hazing incidents, including:

• The Dean of Students Office, which oversees student conduct.
• University Police Department (UTPD) for criminal matters.
• An anonymous online reporting form.
• The Title IX Office for incidents involving sex-based discrimination or harassment.

Notably, UT Austin is recognized for its commitment to transparency. Its public Hazing Violations page is one of the most comprehensive among Texas universities, listing organizations and individuals found responsible for hazing, detailing the conduct, and outlining the sanctions imposed.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

The transparency provided by UT’s public records often reveals a continuous struggle against hazing:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): Among the incidents documented on UT’s Hazing Violations page, the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity was sanctioned in 2023. Reports indicated that new members were directed to consume milk to the point of sickness and perform strenuous calisthenics. The organization was found responsible for hazing, placed on probation for multiple years, and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education programs.
• Texas Cowboys (2018): Historically, UT’s venerable spirit organization, the Texas Cowboys, has faced repeated suspensions for hazing. In 2018, the group was suspended following allegations of sleep deprivation, forced heavy alcohol consumption, and other abusive practices. These incidents underscore that hazing is not limited to Greek life and can permeate even the most respected campus traditions. The death of a “New Man” in 2018, while officially listed as an accidental traffic fatality, had parents alleging sleep deprivation related to hazing as a contributing factor.
• Other Greek Organizations: UT’s public log consistently shows various fraternities and sororities receiving sanctions, ranging from deferred suspensions to full bans, for activities involving forced alcohol consumption, physical discomfort, and degrading rituals.

The repeated presence of certain organizations on this list indicates persistent challenges despite university efforts.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases originating from the University of Texas at Austin would typically be litigated in courts within Travis County. Law enforcement involvement could include both the UT Police Department (UTPD) and the Austin Police Department (APD), depending on the location of the incident.

Potential defendants in a civil lawsuit are similar to other institutions:

• Individual students who perpetrated the hazing.
• The local chapter.
• The national fraternity or sorority organization, especially if a pattern of similar incidents can be demonstrated.
• The University of Texas at Austin and the University of Texas System Board of Regents, particularly when claims include negligent supervision, failure to act on prior warnings, or a failure to adequately enforce known policies. UT’s own public hazing log can be a significant piece of evidence in establishing prior knowledge and foreseeability.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

For UT Austin students and their parents, including those residing in Delaware, a strategic and informed approach to hazing is vital:

• Review UT’s Hazing Violations Page: Regularly check the university’s public records to understand potential risks associated with specific organizations.
• Understand Non-Greek Risks: Be aware that hazing extends to spirit organizations, athletic teams, and other clubs, not just fraternities and sororities.
• Document Thoroughly: Immediately collect and preserve all evidence, including digital communications, photos, medical records, and detailed notes, for any suspected hazing incident.
• Report Thoughtfully: While UT offers various reporting options, consider consulting with an attorney before initiating a formal report to ensure evidence is secured and rights are protected.
• Consult a Texas Hazing Lawyer: An attorney experienced in Texas hazing law can effectively utilize UT’s public hazing records as evidence, navigate the complexities of claims against a large public university, and advocate for your child’s rights in Travis County courts.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, nestled in the heart of Dallas, represents a prominent choice for many Delaware families seeking a private, rigorous education. Known for its picturesque campus, strong academics, and active social scene, SMU also has a significant Greek presence. For Dallas families and those in Delaware, hazing at SMU presents unique challenges related to a private institution’s policies and reporting. Cases arising from SMU would be handled in Dallas County courts.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Southern Methodist University (SMU) boasts a beautiful campus and a reputation for academic rigor, attracting a talented student body from backgrounds that include many from Delaware. Located in University Park, a residential enclave within Dallas, SMU’s culture is characterized by strong traditions, competitive athletics, and a vibrant social calendar. Greek life plays a particularly prominent role at SMU, with a high percentage of undergraduates participating in fraternities and sororities affiliated with national organizations. The allure of social prestige and a close-knit campus community often draw students to these organizations, but also, at times, exposes them to hazing risks.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU strictly prohibits hazing, adhering to both Texas state law and its own institutional policies. Its anti-hazing stance applies to all university-recognized student organizations, including Greek chapters, athletic teams, and clubs, regardless of whether the activities occur on or off campus. The policy clearly defines prohibited behaviors, emphasizing the unacceptability of any act that causes or is likely to cause physical or mental harm, humiliation, or degradation for the purpose of initiation, affiliation, or continued membership.

Reporting mechanisms at SMU typically include:

• The Dean of Students Office.
• The Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards.
• SMU Police Department for criminal matters.
• An Anonymous Reporting Hotline or online portal.

SMU also employs platforms like “Real Response,” a digital tool designed to facilitate anonymous reporting of misconduct, including hazing, among its student population. However, as a private institution, SMU’s records regarding specific hazing violations and disciplinary actions are generally less transparent to the public than those of state-funded universities.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

While SMU’s hazing incident reports are not as publicly accessible as those from some state universities, past events underscore the ongoing challenges:

• Kappa Alpha Order Incident (2017): A significant incident involved the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity, which faced severe sanctions following widespread reports of hazing. New members were allegedly subjected to forced alcohol consumption, physical abuse (including paddling), and extreme sleep deprivation. The chapter was suspended for an extended period, leading to restrictions on its ability to recruit new members for several years. This incident revealed the dark side of “tradition” on campus and resulted in a renewed focus on hazing prevention efforts at SMU.
• Other Sanctions: SMU’s internal records and occasional news reports have indicated that other Greek organizations and clubs have faced disciplinary actions, including probationary periods, activity restrictions, and suspensions, for various hazing violations involving alcohol misuse, physical challenges, and demeaning rituals. The lack of extensive public detail often makes comprehensive understanding of these incidents more challenging compared to public institutions.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases originating from Southern Methodist University would typically be litigated in courts within Dallas County. Because SMU is a private institution, the SMU Police Department would be involved in campus-specific investigations, with the Dallas Police Department (DPD) or other local law enforcement agencies handling off-campus criminal matters.

A key difference with private universities, affecting both Dallas families and those in Delaware, is the absence of sovereign immunity, which public Texas universities may invoke. This can potentially ease certain aspects of claims against the university itself, though powerful defense is still to be expected. Potential defendants in a civil lawsuit would include:

• Individual students involved in the hazing.
• The local SMU chapter and its leadership.
• The national fraternity or sorority organization.
• Southern Methodist University as an institution, particularly concerning claims of negligent supervision, failure to adequately enforce policies, or creating an environment conducive to hazing.
• Owners of off-campus properties used for hazing events.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For SMU students and their parents, especially those from Delaware, navigating hazing concerns requires specific strategies:

• Understand Private University Dynamics: Be aware that while SMU has anti-hazing policies, the internal disciplinary process and public transparency may differ from state schools.
• Utilize Reporting Tools Wisely: Use SMU’s anonymous reporting options, but understand their limitations. Consider whether to report with the guidance of legal counsel.
• Document Meticulously: Preserve all digital communications (group chats, social media), photos, medical records, and detailed notes related to any suspected hazing.
• Seek Prompt Medical Care: If injuries occur, prioritize medical attention and ensure medical records clearly state the hazing context.
• Consult a Dallas-Based Hazing Lawyer: An attorney experienced in Texas hazing law can help overcome the transparency challenges of a private university, investigate prior incidents from internal records, and pursue claims effectively in Dallas County courts.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Christian university in Waco, holds a unique position among Texas institutions. Attracting students from across Texas and the nation, including Delaware, Baylor is known for its strong academic programs, vibrant spiritual life, and fervent athletic fan base. However, like many other universities, Baylor has also grappled with hazing, an issue that can be particularly nuanced given its institutional values and past controversies. Hazing cases arising from Baylor incidents would be handled in McLennan County courts.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University, nestled in Waco, Texas, is the oldest continuously operating university in Texas and the largest Baptist university in the world. It provides a distinctive educational experience rooted in its Christian mission, attracting students—including those from Delaware—who value academic excellence within a faith-based community. Baylor’s campus culture is characterized by strong traditions, a commitment to service, and immense pride in its athletic programs. Greek life plays a notable role, with numerous fraternities and sororities, although membership is often balanced with other faith-based and service organizations. The university strives to foster an environment of respect and safety, endeavors that are sometimes challenged by instances of misconduct like hazing.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University unequivocally prohibits hazing, in line with Texas state law and its own commitment to student well-being. Its comprehensive anti-hazing policy applies to all student organizations, including Greek chapters, athletic teams, spiritual groups, and any other university-affiliated entities. The policy details prohibited behaviors, ensuring that any activity endangering the physical or mental health or safety of a student, or causing humiliation or degradation for the purpose of affiliation, is strictly forbidden.

Baylor provides various channels for reporting hazing incidents, including:

• The Dean of Students Office.
• The Department of Student Conduct and Community Standards.
• Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) for criminal matters.
• An anonymous reporting hotline and online reporting portal.
• The Title IX Office for incidents involving gender-based misconduct.

Baylor operates under its own private institutional review processes, which, while thorough, are typically not subject to the same public disclosure requirements as state-funded universities.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history includes incidents and investigations related to hazing, illustrating persistent challenges despite its institutional values:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): A significant incident within Baylor Athletics involved its baseball team. Following an internal investigation into hazing allegations, 14 players were suspended, with the suspensions staggered across the early part of the season. The exact nature of the hazing was not fully disclosed publicly, but the university confirmed violations of its anti-hazing policy. This event underscored that hazing can occur within athletic programs, even at institutions with strong ethical codes, and that high-profile sports teams are not immune to such misconduct.
• Past Institutional Controversies: Baylor has faced intense scrutiny regarding its handling of past sexual assault cases (unrelated to hazing) that touched its football program. These events, while distinct from hazing, highlight the broader challenges of institutional oversight, accountability, and the enforcement of student conduct policies, issues that can also become central in hazing litigation against the university.
• Greek Life Violations: Over the years, some Greek organizations at Baylor have faced disciplinary actions for hazing, though specific details may not be as readily available in public records. These sanctions typically include probationary periods, restrictions on social activities, or temporary suspensions, indicating ongoing vigilance is necessary.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases originating from Baylor University would typically be litigated in courts within McLennan County. Law enforcement involvement could include the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) for on-campus incidents and the Waco Police Department for off-campus criminal matters.

Similar to SMU, Baylor’s status as a private university means it does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it a more direct target for civil claims than public universities. This affects both Waco families and those in Delaware. Potential defendants in a civil lawsuit would include:

• Individual students who directly perpetrated the hazing.
• The local Baylor chapter and its leadership.
• The national fraternity or sorority organization.
• Baylor University as an institution, under theories of negligent supervision, failure to enforce its own policies, or creating an environment that allowed hazing to occur.
• Coaches or university officials, particularly in incidents involving athletic programs or other university-sponsored groups.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

For Baylor students and their parents, including those from Delaware, understanding how to address hazing concerns within a private institutional context is essential:

• Deep Dive into Policies: Thoroughly review Baylor’s Student Code of Conduct and specific anti-hazing policies, noting the reporting procedures and potential consequences for violations.
• Cultural Sensitivity: Recognize that Baylor’s faith-based mission might influence how hazing incidents are communicated internally; ensure that reporting aligns with your goals for accountability.
• Document Everything Diligently: Immediately gather and preserve all available evidence, including digital communications, photos, videos, and comprehensive notes on incidents and injuries.
• Seek Prompt Medical Care: Any physical or psychological harm warrants immediate medical attention, with explicit documentation in medical records linking the injuries to hazing.
• Consult an Experienced Texas Hazing Lawyer: Given Baylor’s private status and unique institutional culture, a lawyer experienced in Texas hazing law can offer specialized guidance, help navigate potential internal investigations, and vigorously pursue claims in McLennan County courts.

6. Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

On college campuses across Texas, including those frequented by students from Delaware, Greek life remains a dominant social and leadership force. However, for many fraternities and sororities, the allure of tradition and camaraderie carries a dark underbelly: a history of hazing. When a tragic incident occurs at a Texas chapter, a critical part of building a legal case involves examining not just the local chapter’s actions, but also the extensive hazing history of its national parent organization. This is a complex but crucial area for accountability.

6.1 Why National Histories Matter

Many fraternities and sororities with chapters at Texas universities—including UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor—are part of larger national or international organizations. These national bodies set policies, provide risk management guidelines, offer training, and oversee their local chapters.

Why their national histories matter:

• Foreshadowing and Foreseeability: National organizations, by their very nature, collect information about all their chapters. They often have thick anti-hazing manuals and extensive risk policies precisely because they have faced deaths, catastrophic injuries, and multi-million-dollar lawsuits in the past. When a Texas chapter repeats a pattern of behavior (e.g., alcohol hazing, physical abuse, sleep deprivation) that has historically led to injury or death in another state, it powerfully demonstrates foreseeability. The national organization knew, or should have known, the dangers.
• Pattern Evidence: Repeated incidents of similar hazing practices across different chapters of the same national organization establish a clear pattern. This pattern can be used in civil litigation to argue that the national organization had a systemic problem, failed to adequately address it, and was therefore grossly negligent in its supervision of its chapters.
• Organizational Liability: National organizations benefit financially and reputationally from their chapters. This benefit comes with a responsibility to ensure the safety of their members. When they fail to enforce their policies, ignore red flags, or provide insufficient oversight, they can be held directly liable for the harm caused by their local chapters.
• Settlement Leverage: Demonstrating a national organization’s pattern of hazing can significantly increase settlement leverage. Defense attorneys and insurance carriers often prefer to settle cases rather than face a jury presented with a long history of misconduct from multiple campuses.

6.2 Organization Mapping: From National to Texas Campuses

Numerous national fraternities and sororities have a presence on Texas campuses, and some carry a documented history of hazing incidents that warrant scrutiny. While we cannot list every single chapter or incident, here’s a synthesized look at some prominent organizations and their national hazing patterns, which can inform cases against their Texas counterparts. For families in Delaware, this means that even if a local Texas chapter lacks a publicly known hazing record, its national organization’s history can play a significant role.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike):

  • Pike is one of the largest fraternities in North America. Its national history is unfortunately marred by multiple hazing-related deaths, often linked to alcohol.
  • Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University (2021): Foltz tragically died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume excessive alcohol during a “Big/Little” event. This incident resulted in a $10 million settlement for his family from both the national fraternity and the university.
  • David Bogenberger – Northern Illinois University (2012): Bogenberger died of alcohol poisoning at a fraternity event. His family later received a $14 million settlement from members present.
  • Such patterns demonstrate that alcohol-fueled “Big/Little” events are a known, dangerous ritual within this organization, making similar incidents in Texas highly foreseeable.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE):

  • SAE has been dubbed “America’s deadliest fraternity” due to a troubling number of hazing-related deaths and serious injuries nationwide.
  • University of Alabama – Traumatic Brain Injury Case (filed 2023): A pledge allegedly suffered a traumatic brain injury during a hazing ritual, leading to an ongoing lawsuit against the fraternity.
  • Texas A&M University – Chemical Burns Case (2021): Two pledges alleged forced strenuous activity and having industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit poured on them, resulting in severe chemical burns requiring skin grafts. They sued the fraternity for $1 million.
  • University of Texas at Austin – Assault Case (2024): An international student alleged severe assault and injuries at an SAE party, with the chapter already under suspension for prior violations.
  • These incidents, particularly the Texas-specific ones, illustrate a pattern of physical abuse, degrading rituals, and alcohol misuse.

• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ):

  • This fraternity has also faced national scrutiny and legal action due to hazing-related deaths.
  • Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University (2017): Gruver died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to participate in a “Bible study” drinking game. His death led to the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana, a felony hazing statute, and resulted in a $6.1 million verdict in civil litigation against members.
  • The tragic circumstances of Gruver’s death serve as a template for understanding risks at Phi Delta Theta chapters across Texas.

• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ):

  • Pi Kappa Phi’s national organization has also been implicated in fatal hazing incidents.
  • Andrew Coffey – Florida State University (2017): Coffey died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. While the civil settlement details are confidential, the case led to significant policy changes at FSU.
  • University of Houston Incident (2016): As detailed earlier, a UH Pi Kappa Alpha (PKP) pledge suffered a lacerated spleen in a hazing incident, highlighting local risks for this fraternity.
  • The repeating nature of alcohol-related “Big Brother” events within PKP contributes to the argument of foreseeability.

• Kappa Alpha Order (KA):

  • Kappa Alpha Order has faced numerous suspensions and investigations across campuses for hazing violations, often involving alcohol and physical duress.
  • SMU Kappa Alpha Order Incident (2017): As noted, the SMU chapter faced a multi-year suspension after new members were allegedly paddled, forced to drink, and deprived of sleep. This local Texas incident is a direct example of national patterns appearing in our state.
  • This fraternity’s consistent issues with hazing are a matter of public record at institutions nationwide.

• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ):

  • Kappa Sigma has a history of severe hazing, including incidents leading to death and serious injury.
  • Chad Meredith – University of Miami (2001): Meredith, a pledge, drowned after being coerced into swimming across a lake while intoxicated. His family was awarded a $12.6 million verdict, a pivotal case in hazing litigation that led to Florida’s Chad Meredith Law criminalizing hazing.
  • Texas Christian University (2018): A Kappa Sigma member committed suicide after being charged with hazing offenses, where pledges were allegedly coerced into drinking 15 shots in rapid succession, resulting in one hospitalization.
  • This history underscores the extreme dangers associated with Kappa Sigma’s hazing traditions.

• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI):

  • FIJI has been at the center of several high-profile hazing cases, including one that resulted in severe brain injury.
  • Danny Santulli – University of Missouri (2021): Santulli suffered catastrophic, permanent brain damage after being forced to consume excessive alcohol during a “pledge dad reveal” event. His family settled lawsuits with 22 defendants, reportedly for multi-million dollar amounts, making it a stark example of life-altering non-fatal hazing.

6.3 Tie Back to Legal Strategy

The cumulative weight of these national and campus-specific hazing histories forms a cornerstone of our legal strategy. When a Delaware family brings a hazing case in Texas, we meticulously investigate these patterns to:

• Establish Foreseeability: Argue that national organizations and universities knew, or should have known, that specific hazing activities were dangerous and could lead to injury or death, given the repeated incidents across their system. This undermines claims that a local incident was “unforeseeable.”
• Demonstrate Gross Negligence: Show that despite having knowledge of these dangers, national organizations and universities failed to take adequate steps to prevent or stop hazing. This could involve showing that anti-hazing policies were merely “paper policies” and were not genuinely enforced, or that prior warnings were ignored.
• Strengthen Claims for Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, establishing a pattern of deliberate indifference or reckless disregard for student safety can support claims for punitive damages, which are designed to punish defendants and deter future misconduct.
• Navigate Insurance Coverage: Understanding the national context helps in disputes with insurance carriers who might try to deny coverage by arguing hazing was an “intentional act.” We can often argue that the national organization’s (covered) negligence in supervision is the core issue, not just the individual (uncovered) intentional acts.

By connecting local incidents to this broader historical context, we can expose systemic failures and build compelling arguments for accountability, ensuring that the lessons from past tragedies are finally learned and translated into justice for our clients.

7. Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

The legal battle following a hazing incident is often complex, pitting victims and their families against powerful institutions with vast resources. Building a successful case requires a meticulous approach to evidence collection, a clear understanding of potential damages, and a strategic legal plan. At Attorney911, we leverage our experience in complex litigation to navigate these challenges, ensuring no stone is left unturned. This section outlines the critical elements involved in constructing a strong hazing claim.

7.1 Evidence: The Foundation of Every Case

In hazing cases, securing evidence quickly is paramount, as it can be intentionally destroyed or simply disappear over time. Attorney911’s video “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) explains best practices for preserving screenshots and photos, which is critical in these situations. The following categories of evidence are crucial:

• Digital Communications: In 2025, group chats and direct messages are often the most potent sources of evidence.

  • Platforms: GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage/SMS, Signal, Telegram, Discord, Slack, and even fraternity/sorority-specific apps.
  • Content: Messages reveal planning, intent, knowledge, coercion tactics, who was involved, and what happened before, during, and after incidents.
  • Preservation: Immediate screenshots of entire threads (showing sender, timestamps, context) are vital. Even “disappearing” messages (e.g., Snapchat) must be screen-captured as soon as possible. Digital forensics can sometimes recover deleted data, but original captures are best.

• Photos & Videos: Visual evidence can be incredibly powerful.

  • Content: Photos or videos showing hazing events (even if framed as “fun”), injuries, humiliating acts, forced drinking/consumption, or dangerous conditions.
  • Source: Content filmed by members themselves, shared in chats, or posted on social media. Security footage from venues or Ring/doorbell cameras can also be crucial.
  • Injuries: Multiple angles, close-ups, and documentation over several days show the progression and severity of harm.

• Internal Organization Documents: These provide insight into an organization’s internal workings and knowledge.

  • Examples: Pledge manuals, initiation scripts, lists of “traditions,” emails or texts from officers about new member activities.
  • Policies: National anti-hazing policies and a local chapter’s understanding or disregard of them.

• University Records: Institutions generate a wealth of data that can be obtained through legal processes.

  • Prior Discipline: Records of past hazing violations, probation, suspensions, or warnings against the same organization or individuals.
  • Incident Reports: Reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices regarding the chapter or any involved students.
  • Compliance Data: Clery Act reports and other institutional disclosures related to campus safety and crime statistics.

• Medical and Psychological Records: These document the direct impact of hazing on the victim’s health.

  • Hospital/ER/Clinic Records: Documentation of injuries, treatments, toxicology reports (blood alcohol content, drugs), and diagnoses. Critically, if the victim states they were hazed, that must be recorded.
  • Therapy/Counseling Records: Evidence of emotional distress, trauma, PTSD, depression, or anxiety resulting from hazing.

• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are often indispensable.

  • Sources: Other pledges, current members, former members (especially those who quit due to hazing), roommates, residential advisors (RAs), coaches, and bystanders. Many individuals, once given legal protection or assurance for their safety, are willing to come forward.

7.2 Damages: Compensating for Hazing’s Toll

Hazing inflicts a wide range of harm, both immediately obvious and deeply hidden. A successful civil lawsuit seeks to recover damages that compensate victims and their families for these losses. Attorney911 offers “The Victim’s Guide to Car Crash Compensation” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLbNemS_YlM), which, while focused on auto accidents, outlines categories of recovery relevant to any serious injury case, including hazing.

• Economic Damages: These are quantifiable financial losses.

  • Medical Expenses: Past and future costs for emergency care, hospitalization, surgeries, rehabilitation, physical therapy, medications, and ongoing specialist care. For catastrophic injuries, a “life care plan” can project lifetime medical needs.
  • Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: Compensation for wages lost due to injury or recovery. Also includes losses for missed tuition/educational expenses, lost scholarships, delayed graduation, and a diminished future earning capacity if injuries lead to permanent disabilities or career impacts.

• Non-Economic Damages: These compensate for subjective but very real suffering.

  • Physical Pain and Suffering: Compensation for the pain caused by injuries and any ongoing discomfort or chronic pain.
  • Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: This includes the profound mental and emotional toll—humiliation, fear, anxiety, depression, PTSD, loss of dignity, and the psychological trauma of abuse.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: When injuries or psychological trauma prevent a victim from pursuing hobbies, interests, social activities, or experiencing the normal joys of life.

• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): In the tragic event of a hazing death, surviving family members can pursue specific damages.

  • Financial: Funeral and burial costs, and the loss of financial support the deceased would have provided.
  • Non-Financial: Compensation for the profound loss of companionship, love, guidance, and society experienced by parents, children, or spouses. This also covers the grief and emotional suffering of the family. More information on such claims can be found on our wrongful death page: https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/.

• Punitive Damages: These are awarded not to compensate the victim, but to punish defendants for egregious conduct and to deter others.

  • Criteria: Punitive damages may be available in cases involving malicious, grossly negligent, or reckless behavior, especially when defendants showed deliberate indifference to known risks or engaged in a cover-up. In Texas, there are statutory caps on punitive damages in most personal injury cases, but they can still be substantial.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Pursuing a hazing claim involves navigating the intricate web of potential defendants and their insurance policies. All involved parties, from individuals to institutions, typically have legal defense and insurance coverage.

• Insurance Companies’ Role: Insurance companies play a significant role, as they ultimately pay many large settlements or judgments. They often argue that their policies do not cover “intentional acts” like hazing or assault.
• Experienced Hazing Lawyers’ Strategy: Attorney911 understands how to counter these defenses. Our team, especially with Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), knows the strategies insurers use. We identify all potential sources of coverage (personal homeowner policies of individuals, chapter liability policies, national organization’s master policies, university umbrella policies) and rigorously argue that even if individual hazing acts were intentional, the national organization’s or university’s negligence in supervision, policy enforcement, or failure to act on prior warnings is covered by their policies. We fight on behalf of our clients to overcome these denials and ensure maximum recovery.

8. Practical Guides & FAQs

For parents in Delaware and students across Texas, navigating the immediate aftermath and long-term consequences of hazing can be overwhelming. This section offers practical, actionable guides and answers to frequently asked questions, empowering you to protect your child and understand your rights.

8.1 For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

For Delaware parents, recognizing the signs of hazing is the first step. Unfortunately, hazers often instruct new members to conceal their activities, making it difficult to detect.

Warning Signs Your Child May Be Being Hazed:

• Physical Signs: Unexplained bruises, cuts, or sprains; extreme fatigue; weight loss or gain; sleep deprivation; signs of alcohol poisoning or drug use, if atypical for your child.
• Behavioral & Emotional Changes: Sudden secrecy about organizational activities (“I can’t talk about it”); withdrawal from family and friends; personality changes (anxiety, depression, irritability); defensiveness when asked about the group; fear of “getting in trouble” or “letting the chapter down”; constant phone use for group chats; anxiety if they miss messages; signs of being watched or tracked via phone.
• Academic Red Flags: Unexpected drop in grades; missed classes; difficulty concentrating due to exhaustion or stress.
• Financial Red Flags: Unusual requests for money without clear explanation; sudden excessive spending on items for older members; unexplained “fines.”

How to Talk to Your Child (Non-Confrontationally):

• Start with open-ended questions: “How are things going with [group name]? Are you enjoying it?”
• Express concern for their well-being, not judgment: “I’m worried about you because you seem [tired/stressed/distant].”
• Ask about their time: “Are they respecting your time for academics and rest?”
• Ask about activities: “What kind of activities does new member education involve?” (without using the word “hazing”).
• Reassure them: Emphasize that your primary concern is their safety and health, and you will support them no matter what.
• Ensure confidentiality: Let them know you will not share information without their permission, unless they are in danger.

What to Do If You Suspect Hazing:

1. Prioritize Safety First: If your child is in immediate physical danger, heavily intoxicated, or severely injured, call 911 immediately. Your child’s health is paramount, regardless of potential policy violations.
2. Document Everything: If your child confides in you, write down everything they say, including dates, times, and specific details. Take photos of any injuries or humiliating situations if possible. Screenshot any digital evidence they show you (texts, group chats, social media posts).
3. Seek Medical Attention: For any injuries or psychological distress, ensure your child sees a doctor or mental health professional. Explicitly state the suspected cause (hazing) so it’s documented in their medical records.
4. Report, with Guidance: Many schools have anonymous hazing hotlines (e.g., 1-888-NOT-HAZE) or online reporting forms. The Dean of Students office or Campus Police are also options. However, consider consulting with a hazing attorney first to strategize the reporting process and protect your child’s rights.
5. Do NOT Confront: Avoid directly confronting the organization or individual members yourself. This can cause evidence to disappear, lead to retaliation, and complicate any future legal action.

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

For students in Delaware considering joining a group in Texas—or current pledges experiencing doubt—it’s vital to recognize true hazing and protect yourself.

Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Decision Guide:

Ask yourself these critical questions:

• Secrecy: Am I being told to keep secrets from family, friends outside the group, or university officials?
• Coercion: Do I feel pressured or forced to do things I don’t want to do? Is my “consent” given under duress?
• Degradation: Is anything making me feel humiliated, embarrassed, or disrespected?
• Physical/Mental Harm: Is anything endangering my physical health or safety (lack of sleep, forced exercise, coerced eating/drinking) or causing severe mental stress (anxiety, fear, isolation)?
• Unequal Treatment: Are older members making new members do things they don’t have to do?
• Necessity: Is this activity truly crucial to the group’s mission, or is it just for “initiation”?
• Bystander Test: Would I do this if my parents, a university administrator, or a local police officer were watching?

If you answered YES to any of these, it’s likely hazing. Remember, Texas Education Code § 37.155 states that consent is not a defense to hazing.

How to Exit Safely:

• Immediate Danger: If you are in immediate physical danger, heavily intoxicated, or injured, call 911 or campus police without hesitation. Texas law provides good-faith reporter immunity, meaning you generally won’t get in trouble for seeking help in an emergency, even if underage drinking was involved.
• Deciding to De-Pledge/Resign: You have the absolute right to leave any organization at any time. You are not “trapped.”
  • Tell a Trusted Adult: Confide in a parent (our firm is often a first contact for students), resident advisor (RA), or close friend outside the organization.
  • Formal Resignation (Optional, but Recommended): Send a clear, concise email or text message to the chapter president or new member educator stating: “I am resigning my pledge/membership to [Organization Name] effective immediately.” Do not get drawn into “one last meeting” where you may be pressured.
  • Document Threats: If you experience any threats or retaliation, document them (screenshots, notes) and report them to the Dean of Students or campus police.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were once part of a hazing culture, or witnessed it, your voice matters. You may feel a complex mix of guilt, fear, and loyalty. However, your testimony can be instrumental in preventing future harm and holding bad actors accountable.

• Acknowledge Your Feelings: It’s normal to feel conflicted. Acknowledging your role or witnessing abuse can be difficult, but taking action is a powerful step towards healing and justice.
• Your Testimony Matters: Your firsthand account and any evidence you possess (old group chats, photos, videos) can be vital for victims seeking justice. It can corroborate claims, expose patterns, and identify perpetrators.
• Seek Legal Advice: If you are a former member with concerns about personal liability, or have specific knowledge about hazing, it is wise to seek independent legal advice. An attorney can explain your rights, potential implications, and how your cooperation might be structured. Attorney911’s criminal defense experience (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/) means we can advise on both criminal exposure and civil liability aspects for witnesses.
• Cooperating Can Prevent Future Tragedy: Many former members choose to come forward because they recognize the danger and want to prevent others from suffering. Your courage can save lives.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

The moments immediately following a hazing incident are critical. Unfortunately, many well-intentioned families from Delaware and students in Texas make mistakes that can severely damage a potential claim for justice. Attorney911’s video on “Client Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Injury Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY) details these pitfalls.

1. Letting Your Child Delete Messages or “Clean Up” Evidence:

   • Why it’s wrong: Deleting digital evidence (texts, photos, videos) can be seen as obstruction and makes it incredibly difficult to prove what happened. It undermines credibility.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even if it’s embarrassing. Forward all digital communications to a secure, independent email or cloud storage.

2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly:

   • Why it’s wrong: This immediately raises alarms, prompting the organization to destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare its defenses.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in detail, then contact an attorney before any direct communication with the perpetrators or organization leadership.

3. Signing University “Release” or “Resolution” Forms Without Legal Review:

   • Why it’s wrong: Universities often pressure families into quick, internal “resolutions” that may include waivers of liability, effectively preventing future lawsuits. These settlements are typically far below what a case is truly worth.
   • What to do instead: Never sign anything from the university or an insurance representative without an experienced hazing attorney reviewing it first.

4. Posting Details on Social Media Before Talking to a Lawyer:

   • Why it’s wrong: Public posts can be used by defense attorneys to attack credibility, create inconsistencies, or argue that privacy has been waived.
   • What to do instead: Document everything privately for your attorney. Let your legal team control the messaging and timing of any public statements.

5. Letting Your Child Go Back to “One Last Meeting” or “Talk Things Out”:

   • Why it’s wrong: These are often opportunities for the organization to pressure, intimidate, or trick the victim into making statements that harm their case.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication should go through your attorney.

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

   • Why it’s wrong: University investigations often prioritize the institution’s reputation over the victim’s full recovery or true accountability. Critical evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, and the statute of limitations continues to run.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence, seek medical attention, and consult with a lawyer immediately. University processes are separate from legal remedies.

7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without an Attorney:

   • Why it’s wrong: Adjusters are trained to minimize payouts. Recorded statements can be used against you, and early settlement offers are almost always lowball.
   • What to do 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 certain circumstances. Public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin) often claim sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, certain federal violations (like Title IX), or when suing individual employees. Private universities (like SMU, Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections. Every case requires a specific analysis of the facts and applicable law. Contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific evaluation.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  It can be. While hazing is a Class B misdemeanor by default in Texas, it becomes 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. The law recognizes that true voluntary consent is often not present in coercive hazing environments driven by peer pressure and power imbalances.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  Generally, there is a 2-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death in Texas. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this if the harm or its cause was not immediately known. In cases involving cover-ups or fraud, the statute may be “tolled” (paused). Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, and records are destroyed. For more information, you can watch our video, “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c). Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to protect your rights.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  Location does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities can still be liable based on their sponsorship, control, prior knowledge, and foreseeability of hazing activities, even if they occur at off-campus rentals or private residences. Many major hazing cases that resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments have occurred off-campus.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  While some high-profile cases do attract media attention, most hazing cases are resolved through confidential settlements. We prioritize your family’s privacy interests while strategically pursuing accountability. You will always be in control of how much information, if any, is made public.

• “How do contingency fees work for hazing cases?”
  Attorney911 handles hazing cases on a contingency fee basis. This means we don’t get paid unless we win your case. Your family pays no upfront legal fees or hourly charges. This ensures that expert legal representation is accessible to everyone, regardless of their financial situation. For a detailed explanation, watch our video “How Do Contingency Fees Work?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc).

9. About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing crisis, you need more than just a general personal injury lawyer. You need dedicated attorneys who understand the intricate dynamics of power, secrecy, and institutional defense that permeate hazing cases—and who know how to win against them. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, stands ready as your Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Delaware and surrounding areas. We understand that hazing at Texas universities can profoundly affect families in Delaware. Attorney911 is a Houston-based Texas personal injury firm with deep experience in serious injury, wrongful death, and institutional accountability cases. We’ve seen firsthand how hazing devastates lives, and we bring a unique combination of legal prowess and compassionate advocacy to every case.

Why Attorney911 for Hazing Cases

Our firm brings a distinctive set of qualifications that make us uniquely suited to handle complex hazing litigation:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), previously worked as an insurance defense attorney at a national firm. This invaluable experience gives us unparalleled insight into how fraternity and university insurance companies operate. We understand their tactics for undervaluing claims, their delay strategies, and their arguments for coverage exclusions. We know their playbook because we used to run it, providing a critical edge in settlement negotiations and litigation.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Led by managing partner Ralph Manginello (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/), Attorney911 has a proven track record of taking on formidable defendants. Our firm was one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, a monumental case against a billion-dollar corporation. We are comfortable and experienced in federal court (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) and are not intimidated by the vast resources of national fraternities, universities, or their polished defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won; we know how to fight powerful defendants.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: Our firm has successfully achieved multi-million-dollar results in wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. We don’t settle cheap. We meticulously build cases, working with economists to value long-term care needs for brain injuries, permanent disabilities, and other life-altering harm, ensuring that our clients receive the full compensation they deserve. Our extensive wrongful death experience is detailed at https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/.
• Dual Criminal & Civil Hazing Expertise: When hazing leads to criminal charges against individuals, our firm’s experience, bolstered by Ralph Manginello’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA), means we understand how criminal proceedings interact with civil litigation. This dual capability allows us to provide comprehensive guidance, advising on both sets of legal implications.
• Investigative Depth: We don’t just react; we proactively investigate. We work with a network of experts—medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists—to uncover every piece of evidence. This includes obtaining deleted group chats, photos, videos, subpoenaing national fraternity’s prior incident records, and accessing university files through discovery and public records requests. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.
• Empathy and Victim Advocacy: We know this deeply personal and painful for families. Our approach balances aggressive legal action with humble, empathetic support. We are committed to getting you answers, holding the right people accountable, and fighting to prevent future tragedies.

Call to Action

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

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

What to Expect in Your Free Consultation:

• We will listen to your story with empathy and 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 criminal acts, filing a civil lawsuit, or a combination of both.
• We will discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
• We’ll answer your questions about legal costs, clarifying that we work on a contingency fee basis—we don’t get paid unless we win your case.
• There is no pressure to hire us on the spot; we encourage you to take the time you need to decide.
• Everything you tell us is strictly confidential.

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

Contact Attorney911 Today:

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

Hablamos Español

• Contact our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, directly for consultation in Spanish: lupe@atty911.com.
• Servicios legales en español están 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