Exposing the Shadows: A Fannin County Family’s Guide to Hazing, Accountability, and Texas Law

It’s recruitment season at a prominent Texas university. Your child, a bright student from Fannin County, feels the excitement building, eager to find their place among peers. They receive a bid from a fraternity or sorority they’ve admired, a group promising lifelong friendships and networking opportunities. Soon, though, the late-night calls start. Their phone vibrates constantly with urgent group messages. They begin to look tired, withdrawn, and evasive when you ask about their “new member education.” One night, a call comes in—not from them, but from a concerned friend or an anonymous tip. Your child has been pressured into an alcohol-fueled “tradition,” pushed to their physical limits, or humiliated in front of others. They are scared, hurt, and desperate for it to stop, but also terrified of the consequences if they speak up.

This isn’t a hypothetical scenario for families in Fannin County, Texas, or across the Lone Star State. It’s a stark reality playing out in dorms, off-campus houses, and even athletic facilities each semester. The desire to belong, to find community, can sometimes be twisted into a cycle of abuse disguised as tradition, leaving lasting physical and psychological scars. When that trust is broken, and a child from our Fannin County community is hurt, we understand the overwhelming confusion, anger, and fear.

We are The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, known as Attorney911, and we are the Legal Emergency Lawyers™. We’ve dedicated ourselves to representing victims of negligence, serious injury, and institutional abuse throughout Texas. This comprehensive guide is designed to empower Fannin County families with the knowledge they need to understand modern hazing practices, the legal protections available under Texas and federal law, and how to pursue accountability when the worst happens. Whether your child attends Texas A&M, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Houston, SMU, Baylor, or another institution across our great state, the patterns of hazing, the legal challenges, and the path to justice often share critical similarities. We serve families across Texas, including all of Fannin County—from Bonham and Honey Grove to Savoy and Trenton—and understand the unique concerns of communities sending their children off to college.

This article is designed to be your definitive resource, covering:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, far beyond mere pranks.
• The Texas and federal legal frameworks that define and prohibit hazing.
• Powerful national hazing cases that set precedents for accountability.
• In-depth analysis of specific incidents and climates at the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor.
• The critical role a fraternity or sorority’s national history plays in legal claims.
• The strategic process of building a strong hazing case, preserving evidence, and understanding potential damages.
• Practical, actionable guides for parents, students, and witnesses in Fannin County and beyond.

Please remember, while this guide offers comprehensive information, it serves as general education, not as specific legal advice. Every hazing situation is unique. If you believe your child has been subjected to hazing, a confidential, no-obligation consultation with an experienced attorney is crucial to understand your legal options.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW, their health and safety are the absolute priorities.

• If your child is facing immediate physical harm, is intoxicated, or seriously injured, call 911 immediately. Prioritize their medical care above all else. Most schools and Texas law have good-faith reporter protections, meaning you will not get in trouble for seeking help in an emergency.
• After ensuring their physical safety, 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 after a hazing incident, time is of the essence:

• Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.” Documenting injuries early is critical.
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted. This includes screenshots of group chats, texts, and direct messages, as well as photographs of any injuries from multiple angles. Save any physical items like damaged clothing or receipts for forced purchases.
• Write down everything while your memory is fresh: who, what, when, where, and any relevant details or conversations.
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity, sorority, or coaching staff directly. This can lead to evidence destruction or coached testimonies.
  • Sign anything from the university, the organization, or their insurance company without consulting an attorney.
  • Post details on public social media. This can compromise your case and be used against you.
  • Allow your child to delete messages or “clean up” any evidence.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours. Evidence disappears fast, witnesses graduate, and organizations work quickly to control the narrative. We can help preserve critical evidence and protect your child’s legal rights. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for an immediate, confidential consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For families in Fannin County, Texas, who may believe hazing is a relic of bygone collegiate eras or simply harmless “boys will be boys” antics, the reality is far more insidious and dangerous. Modern hazing has evolved, becoming more covert, psychologically manipulative, and often digitally enforced, making it harder to detect and expose. It’s no longer just about paddle swats or forced calisthenics; it encompasses a complex web of behaviors designed to strip pledges of their individuality, instill absolute loyalty through fear, and demand submission to a group’s arbitrary rules, all under the guise of “earning membership.”

Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

At its core, hazing refers to any intentional, knowing, or reckless act directed against a student, for the purpose of initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students. This act, whether on or off campus, endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student.

It’s crucial to understand that “I agreed to it” or “they said it was voluntary” does not automatically make the activity safe or legal. When there is a power imbalance, peer pressure, or the fear of social exclusion, so-called “consent” is often legally meaningless. Such situations create a coercive environment where true voluntary participation is impossible. The law, and common sense, recognize that a student’s desire to belong should never be exploited to inflict harm.

Main Categories of Hazing

Hazing manifests in various forms, often escalating from subtle manipulation to outright violence. Recognizing these different categories is the first step toward understanding the threat.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is tragically the most common cause of hazing fatalities. It involves forced or coerced drinking, often far beyond safe limits. Examples include:

  • “Lineups” where pledges consume multiple drinks in rapid succession.
  • Chugging contests or games designed for extreme intoxication.
  • “Big/Little” events where new members might be given handles of hard liquor.
  • Being pressured to consume unknown or mixed substances, sometimes with illicit drugs.

• Physical Hazing: This category covers any forced physical act that endangers a student’s body.

  • Paddling and beatings with various objects, often inflicting severe bruising or internal injuries.
  • Extreme calisthenics, “workouts,” or “smokings” – intense physical exercises pushed to the point of exhaustion, injury, or even rhabdomyolysis (a breakdown of muscle tissue that can damage kidneys).
  • Sleep deprivation, food or water restriction over extended periods.
  • Exposure to extreme environments such as being left outside in freezing temperatures or overly hot, confined spaces.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This degrading form of hazing aims to strip individuals of their dignity and can be deeply traumatic.

  • Forced nudity or partial nudity in front of others.
  • Simulated sexual acts or forcing individuals into demeaning sexual positions.
  • Being made to wear degrading costumes or “uniforms” that mark them as inferior.
  • Acts with racial, homophobic, or sexist overtones, including the use of slurs or forced role-play that perpetuates stereotypes.

• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but profoundly damaging, psychological hazing creates a climate of fear and control.

  • Verbal abuse, yelling, insults, and threats of physical harm or social exclusion.
  • Isolation from friends, family, or the outside world, making individuals entirely dependent on the group.
  • Manipulation or forced confessions designed to create blackmail material or control.
  • Public shaming sessions, whether in person or on social media, to make individuals feel worthless.

• Digital/Online Hazing: This is a modern evolution, using technology to enforce hazing 24/7, making it pervasive and difficult to escape.

  • Constant group chat monitoring with demands for instant responses, often throughout the night, leading to severe sleep deprivation.
  • “Challenges” or dares posted on social media platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, or TikTok, designed to humiliate or coerce.
  • Pressure to create or share compromising images or videos, which can then be used for blackmail.
  • Geo-tracking apps where pledges are required to share their live location with older members.
  • Social media policing, where new members’ online activity is controlled, and they are forced to like or share specific content.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not confined to the stereotypes of fraternity houses. It is a systemic problem that permeates various groups across university campuses in Texas, affecting students from communities like Fannin County.

• Fraternities and Sororities: This is the most commonly recognized area, including Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations. Pressure to join and conform can be intense.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: Texas A&M’s Corps of Cadets, for example, has a culture deeply rooted in tradition, but this can sometimes be exploited for hazing, as seen in past incidents.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs, and Student Organizations: Groups like the Texas Cowboys at UT Austin, or various spirit organizations, can also be venues for hazing under the guise of upholding “tradition.”
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming, cheer, and even esports, hazing can occur within team settings, often rationalized as “team bonding” or “toughening up.”
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups can be susceptible to hazing, where senior members inflict abuse on newer recruits.
• Academic and Cultural Organizations: Less common, but still possible, are instances of hazing within academic honor societies, cultural associations, or professional fraternities where a hierarchy exists.

The common thread in all these environments is the use of social status, hierarchy, and a perceived “tradition” to maintain secrecy and discourage reporting. This culture of silence makes it essential for Fannin County families and students to recognize even subtle warning signs and understand their rights.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape around hazing in Texas is crucial for Fannin County families seeking accountability. Texas has specific laws designed to combat hazing, and these are often reinforced by broader criminal statutes and federal protections.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

The State of Texas clearly defines and prohibits hazing under the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This is the cornerstone of legal action against hazing.

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

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

In plain terms, if someone makes your child do something dangerous, harmful, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they did it intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly (meaning they knew the risk and did it anyway), that’s hazing under Texas law.

Key aspects of the Texas hazing statute:

• Location Doesn’t Matter: Hazing can happen on or off campus, and even at locations far from Fannin County. The law applies regardless of where the acts occur.
• Mental and Physical Harm: The definition covers both physical injuries and significant mental or emotional distress.
• Intent vs. Recklessness: You don’t have to prove malicious intent; being reckless about endangering someone’s health or safety is enough.
• “Consent” is Not a Defense: This is a crucial point. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the activity. The law recognizes that true consent is absent when there’s coercion, peer pressure, or an imbalanced power dynamic.

Texas Education Code § 37.152. Criminal Penalties:
Hazing is a criminal offense in Texas, with penalties that escalate based on the severity of the harm:

• Class B Misdemeanor (default): This applies to hazing that does not cause serious bodily injury (punishment can be up to 180 days in county jail and/or a fine up to $2,000).
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury requiring medical treatment.
• State Jail Felony: If the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. This carries significant prison time and substantial fines.

Additionally, under the Texas Education Code:

• Failing to Report: If a person who is a member or officer of an organization knows of a hazing incident and fails to report it, they can also face misdemeanor charges. This encourages internal accountability.
• Retaliation: Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor offense.

Texas Education Code § 37.153. Organizational Liability:
Organizations themselves—whether a fraternity, sorority, club, or sports team— can be held criminally responsible for hazing if:

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

For organizations, penalties can include fines up to $10,000 per violation. A university can also revoke recognition and ban the organization from campus, severely impacting its future. This provision is vital because it ensures that both individuals and the groups they represent can be held accountable, providing another avenue for justice for Fannin County families.

Texas Education Code § 37.154. Immunity for Good-Faith Reporting:
A person who, in good faith, reports a hazing incident to university officials or law enforcement is generally immune from civil or criminal liability that might result from their report. This is designed to encourage bystanders and victims to come forward without fear of personal legal repercussions. Furthermore, in medical emergencies, Texas law and many university policies provide amnesty for students who call 911, even if they were consuming alcohol underage or were technically involved in the hazing themselves.

Texas Education Code § 37.156. Reporting by Educational Institutions:
Texas colleges and universities have a legal obligation to:

• Provide hazing prevention education to students.
• Publish clear anti-hazing policies.
• Maintain and publicly publish annual reports of all hazing violations and the disciplinary actions taken against organizations. This transparency, as seen at institutions like the University of Texas at Austin (hazing.utexas.edu), is a crucial tool for Fannin County families to research potential groups and for attorneys to establish patterns of knowledge and negligence in civil lawsuits.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

It’s important for Fannin County families to understand that hazing incidents can lead to two distinct, yet often intertwined, types of legal proceedings:

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the State of Texas (or the federal government in certain instances) through a prosecutor. The primary aim of a criminal case is to punish specific individuals (or, less commonly, organizations) for violating the law, potentially leading to jail time, fines, and probation. For hazing, typical criminal charges might include hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, or even manslaughter or negligent homicide in fatal cases.
• Civil Cases: These are initiated by the victims of hazing (or their surviving family members in wrongful death cases). The goal in a civil lawsuit is not punishment but rather monetary compensation for the harm suffered and to compel accountability from those responsible. Civil claims often focus on theories such as negligence (failure to exercise reasonable care), gross negligence (extreme or reckless disregard for safety), wrongful death, negligent hiring or supervision, or premises liability.

Crucially, a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. The standards of proof are different, and a civil jury can find liability even if criminal charges are never filed or result in acquittal. Both types of cases can run side-by-side, offering different avenues for justice for our Fannin County clients.

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

Beyond state laws, federal regulations also play a role in college hazing prevention and accountability:

• The Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This federal law mandates that colleges and universities receiving federal funding must:
  • Publicly report hazing incidents and data in a transparent manner.
  • Implement and strengthen hazing education and prevention programs.
  • Maintain publicly accessible data on hazing violations and disciplinary actions. This will lead to much greater transparency by around 2026, offering more tools for Fannin County families to research campus groups and for attorneys to build cases.
• Title IX: Administered by the U.S. Department of Education, Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded education programs. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, or creates a hostile environment based on gender, it can trigger Title IX obligations for universities. This provides an additional layer of protection and an avenue for complaints, especially in cases of sexualized hazing.
• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges to disclose campus crime statistics, including certain incidents that overlap with hazing, such as assaults, alcohol violations, and drug offenses. This data can help establish patterns of misconduct, and institutions that fail to comply face significant fines.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

When tragedy strikes a family from Fannin County due to hazing, multiple parties can potentially be held accountable in a civil lawsuit:

• Individual Students: Those who actively planned, enforced, carried out, or participated in the hazing acts, or who helped with a cover-up, can be sued.
• Local Chapter/Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself, if it operates as a legal entity. Key individuals acting as officers, “pledge educators,” or those in leadership roles within the chapter can also be named.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters, which often dictates policies, receives dues, and provides oversight to local chapters, can be held liable. Their liability often hinges on whether they knew or should have known about a pattern of hazing (either at that specific chapter or across multiple chapters nationwide) and failed to take adequate preventative or corrective action.
• University or Governing Board: While public universities (like UT Austin, Texas A&M, and UH) may assert some sovereign immunity under Texas law, exceptions for gross negligence, willful misconduct, or failure to address Title IX violations exist. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections. The university’s liability can arise from negligent supervision, failure to enforce policies, ignoring known hazing risks, or failing to adequately respond to reported incidents.
• Third Parties: This can include landlords or property owners of off-campus houses or event spaces where hazing occurred, and even alcohol providers (such as bars) under dram shop liability laws if they illegally served minors or visibly intoxicated individuals.

Every case is fact-specific, and not every party will be liable in every situation. An experienced hazing attorney can help Fannin County families identify all potentially liable parties and craft a comprehensive legal strategy.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

Hazing is a problem that transcends state lines and individual campuses. The tragic incidents that have occurred nationwide serve as crucial precedents and painful lessons, shaping both legislation and legal strategy in Texas. For Fannin County families, understanding these national patterns illuminates the severe risks and the potential for accountability. They underscore that what happens at a major university in Ohio or Louisiana is directly relevant to establishing foreseeability and liability against national organizations and universities here in Texas.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most common and devastating pattern in hazing involves extreme alcohol consumption, often forced or coerced, leading to alcohol poisoning and preventable deaths. These cases highlight systemic failures to protect vulnerable students.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after a bid-acceptance event where he was forced to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol. Fraternity security cameras captured his severe falls, but members agonizingly delayed calling for medical help for nearly 12 hours. The aftermath led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, ongoing civil litigation against the fraternity and individuals, and the enactment of a new, landmark anti-hazing law in Pennsylvania bearing his name. This case starkly demonstrated how extreme intoxication, a horrific delay in calling 911, and a culture of silence amplify the legal devastating consequences.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old FSU student and Pi Kappa Phi pledge, died from alcohol poisoning after a “Big Brother Night” event (a common hazing tradition). Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them. His death led to criminal hazing charges against multiple fraternity members, and Florida State University temporarily suspended all Greek life, overhauling its Fraternity and Sorority Life policies. This tragedy illustrates how seemingly formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a recurring script for disaster, with deadly consequences.
• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): 18-year-old Max Gruver died from acute alcohol intoxication after being forced to participate in a “Bible study” drinking game. Pledges were made to answer trivia questions based on the fraternity’s history, and incorrect answers resulted in forced rapid consumption of high-proof alcohol. His blood alcohol content was 0.495% at the time of his death. Max’s death galvanized the Louisiana legislature to pass the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute, and the Phi Delta Theta chapter was closed. This case is a powerful example of how public outrage and clear evidence of hazing can drive significant legislative change, proving that laws can and do adapt to combat this dangerous behavior.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old BGSU student, died of alcohol poisoning after a Pi Kappa Alpha pledge night where he was forced to drink an entire bottle of whiskey. The incident led to multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members, including hazing-related offenses. Critically, Bowling Green State University, a public institution, agreed to a nearly $3 million settlement with the Foltz family. Other substantial settlements were reached with the Pi Kappa Alpha national fraternity and other individuals. This case underscores that universities, even public ones with potential immunity defenses, can face massive financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities when hazing leads to tragedy. Further establishing individual liability, in 2024, a court ordered Daylen Dunson, the former chapter president, to personally pay $6.5 million to the Stone Foltz family for his direct role in the fatal hazing. This sends a clear message about the individual responsibility of student leaders.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, hazing frequently involves severe physical abuse and degrading rituals, some of which prove fatal, even when alcohol is not the direct cause.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died after brutal physical hazing during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania. He was blindfolded, forced to wear a heavy backpack, and repeatedly tackled in a ritual called “glass ceiling.” The “brothers” agonized over calling for help, delaying essential medical attention. Michael’s death led to multiple criminal convictions, and the Pi Delta Psi national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, and was permanently banned from operating in Pennsylvania. This landmark case highlighted that off-campus “retreats” are often specifically chosen to facilitate hazing away from university oversight and that national organizations bear significant direct and corporate liability.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing isn’t exclusive to Greek life; it’s also a deeply entrenched problem within many athletic programs, where coaches and university officials may turn a blind eye to abusive “team building” activities.

• Northwestern University Athletic Hazing Scandal (2023–2025): In a scandal that rocked the collegiate sports world, former Northwestern football players alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. This included forced sexual acts, racial slurs, and other degrading behaviors by older players. The allegations led to multiple lawsuits against Northwestern University and coaching staff. Head coach Pat Fitzgerald was fired and later confidentially settled a wrongful-termination lawsuit with the university. This high-profile case demonstrated unequivocally that hazing extends far beyond Greek life into major, high-revenue athletic programs, raising critical questions about institutional oversight and responsibility. Separately, in 2025, the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra was suspended for hazing, demonstrating that these issues impact even elite academic and arts organizations.

What These Cases Mean for Fannin County Families

These national tragedies share chilling common threads: forced intoxication, physical violence, extreme humiliation, a critical delay in medical care, and a pervasive culture of silence and cover-up. For families in Fannin County, this means:

• Foreseeability: These cases establish a pattern of dangerous conduct by national organizations. If a chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha in Texas, for example, engages in alcohol-fueled “Big/Little” hazing, the national organization can’t easily claim ignorance, given the prior deaths at Bowling Green, Northern Illinois, and Texas State (2007) and the million-dollar settlements that followed. The national headquarters is presumed to have known of the risks based on its own history and litigation.
• Accountability: These cases prove that holding powerful institutions – national fraternities, universities, and their insurers – accountable is possible and has led to multi-million dollar settlements and verdicts.
• Legislative Change: Tragedies often spur legislative action, strengthening anti-hazing laws, making it easier to prosecute and pursue civil claims.
• Texas is Not Immune: While these specific incidents didn’t happen in Texas, the same national organizations operate here, and the same dangerous patterns emerge at our universities. Fannin County families affected by hazing at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor are engaged in a legal landscape profoundly shaped by these national lessons.

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

For Fannin County families sending their children to universities across the state, it’s vital to understand the specific cultures, hazing policies, and history of incidents at Texas’s major institutions. While our firm is based in Houston, we represent clients from every corner of Texas, including Fannin County, who entrust their children to these schools.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus with a diverse student body, is a central hub for student life in Southeast Texas. Many Houston-area residents and students from nearby communities like Fannin County attend, building connections throughout the region. UH features a large and active Greek life, encompassing IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, and multicultural fraternities and sororities, alongside numerous other student organizations. This dynamic environment, while fostering community, also presents risks for hazing.

5.1.1 Campus & culture snapshot

UH is a public Tier One university located in the heart of Houston. Its campus culture blends commuter convenience with a growing residential experience, attracting students from diverse backgrounds across Texas and beyond. Greek life is a significant part of campus social life, offering a wide array of options for students seeking community and leadership development. Many Fannin County families choose UH for its strong academic programs and its proximity to a major metropolitan area.

5.1.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, clearly prohibiting any behaviors that fall under the Texas Education Code definition of hazing. Their policy applies to all student organizations, whether the activity occurs on or off campus. UH forbids coerced alcohol or substance consumption, physical mistreatment, psychological abuse, and any activity that creates mental distress for initiation or membership purposes. The university provides multiple avenues for reporting hazing, including the Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the UH Police Department (UHPD). UH also commits to publicly posting disciplinary actions related to hazing on its website, though the level of detail can vary.

5.1.3 Selected documented incidents & responses

While UH works to prevent hazing, unfortunate incidents have occurred. In 2016, a Pi Kappa Alpha chapter at UH faced significant scrutiny and criminal charges after pledges were allegedly subjected to a multi-day hazing event involving deprivation of food, water, and sleep. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being violently slammed onto a table or similar surface during the hazing. The chapter was charged with misdemeanor hazing and subsequently suspended by the university. Other disciplinary actions have been publicly documented, showing UH’s willingness to sanction organizations, though often without specific details about the hazing acts themselves, only noting that behavior was “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort” or involved “alcohol misuse.”

5.1.4 How a UH hazing case might proceed

For Fannin County families navigating a hazing incident at UH, legal proceedings would typically involve a few key entities. If a civil lawsuit is pursued, it would likely be filed in the courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County, where the university is located. Criminal investigations could involve either the UH Police Department or the Houston Police Department, depending on the precise location of the incident. Potential defendants in such cases could include the individual students involved, the local chapter itself, the national fraternity or sorority, and, depending on the circumstances, the University of Houston itself as a public institution and/or the property owners if hazing occurred off-campus.

5.1.5 What UH students & parents should do

If you’re a parent in Fannin County with a child at UH, or a UH student yourself, here’s what you should do if you suspect hazing:

• Understand UH’s Reporting Channels: Utilize the Dean of Students Office, UHPD, or the anonymous online reporting forms available on the university’s Greek Life or Student Conduct websites.
• Document Everything: Keep meticulous records of any communications with the university and ensure your child preserves all digital evidence, including group chats and social media.
• Seek Legal Counsel for Prior Incidents: An experienced hazing attorney can help uncover prior disciplinary actions and internal files related to the specific organization at UH, which can be critical for establishing patterns and foreseeability in a civil claim.
• Prioritize Safety and Medical Care: If there’s any injury or concern for well-being, seek immediate medical attention. Document medical visits and injuries thoroughly.
• Don’t Go It Alone: Navigating university bureaucracies and legal systems can be complex and intimidating. Contacting a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases can provide crucial guidance and advocacy.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University (TAMU) in College Station stands as a pillar of tradition and community, deeply ingrained with the Aggie spirit. Its unique culture, particularly embodied by the Corps of Cadets, draws students from all over Texas, including many from Fannin County, seeking structure, leadership, and a strong sense of belonging. However, this dedication to tradition, in both Greek life and Corps organizations, has unfortunately sometimes provided fertile ground for hazing incidents.

5.2.1 Campus & culture snapshot

Texas A&M is renowned for its rich traditions, the Aggie network, and its emphasis on core values. Located in College Station, deep in the Brazos Valley, its campus environment is distinct, characterized by its size, strong school spirit, and the visible presence of the Corps of Cadets. Greek life is also a significant component of student activities, representing diverse fraternities and sororities. Many Fannin County high school graduates pursue their education at Texas A&M, making the prevention and proper handling of hazing incidents here of paramount importance to our community.

5.2.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

Texas A&M University strictly prohibits hazing across all student organizations, including Greek life and the Corps of Cadets. Their policy aligns with the Texas Education Code, defining hazing broadly to include any intentional or reckless act endangering mental or physical health for initiation or membership. Texas A&M encourages reporting through the Office of Student Conduct, the Corps of Cadets leadership, and the University Police Department (UPD). They also provide an anonymous online reporting system and emphasize that good-faith reporting will not result in disciplinary action against the reporter.

5.2.3 Selected documented incidents & responses

Texas A&M has faced its share of significant hazing allegations and incidents:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ) Lawsuit (around 2021): This case highlighted a deeply disturbing abuse. Two pledges alleged they suffered severe chemical burns after being subjected to a hazing ritual where substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, were poured on them. The incident, which caused injuries requiring emergency skin graft surgeries, resulted in a lawsuit against the fraternity for over $1 million. The SAE chapter was suspended by the university for two years.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): This federal lawsuit brought to light degrading hazing within the Corps. A former cadet alleged he was subjected to simulated sexual acts and was physically bound between beds in a humiliating “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit sought over $1 million in damages. While the university stated it handled the matter under its internal rules, the allegations underscore the unique challenges within tradition-heavy organizations like the Corps.
• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ) Allegations (ongoing since 2023): This national fraternity has faced ongoing litigation at Texas A&M related to allegations of severe physical hazing, resulting in injuries such as rhabdomyolysis (a dangerous condition of severe muscle breakdown from extreme physical exertion). Such cases often require specialized legal representation to address the complex medical and liability aspects.

These incidents demonstrate that hazing at Texas A&M can affect both Greek organizations and the highly structured Corps of Cadets, and that investigations into these matters are critical for upholding student safety.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M hazing case might proceed

For Fannin County families pursuing a hazing claim at Texas A&M, the legal pathway can be intricate. Civil lawsuits would typically be heard in courts with jurisdiction over Brazos County (where College Station is located). Criminal investigations might involve the Texas A&M University Police Department or the College Station Police Department. Potential defendants include the individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and potentially Texas A&M University itself as a state institution, which may assert sovereign immunity (though, as detailed in Section 3, exceptions exist, particularly for gross negligence or Title IX violations).

5.2.5 What Texas A&M students & parents should do

If your child from Fannin County is attending Texas A&M and you suspect hazing:

• Report Internally if Safe: Utilize Texas A&M’s anonymous reporting system or contact the Office of Student Conduct or the Corps of Cadets leadership.
• Be Aware of Distinct Climates: Recognize that hazing can occur within both Greek life and the highly structured environment of the Corps of Cadets; each has specific reporting and disciplinary structures.
• Document Traditions Carefully: If your child participates in a tradition-heavy group, document all activities, especially those that seem secretive, physically demanding, or alcohol-related.
• Understand Immunity Limits: Know that while Texas A&M, as a state institution, may claim sovereign immunity, this does not absolve individuals or national organizations, and exceptions to immunity exist for the university itself under certain circumstances. A knowledgeable attorney can navigate these complexities.
• Contact a Texas Hazing Attorney: An attorney experienced with lawsuits in the College Station area, and against institutions like Texas A&M, can help navigate the unique legal challenges and ensure proper evidence collection and legal strategy.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is the flagship institution of the University of Texas System, hosting a massive student population from diverse backgrounds across Texas, including many from Fannin County. Its spirited campus culture and vibrant Greek life, along with numerous student organizations and athletic programs, define a dynamic collegiate experience. UT has also demonstrated a unique commitment to transparency regarding hazing incidents, making it a valuable case study for accountability.

5.3.1 Campus & culture snapshot

UT Austin, located in the state’s capital, is renowned for its academic excellence, vibrant campus life, and deep-rooted traditions. Its Greek system is extensive and highly visible, attracting students eager to participate in social and philanthropic activities. Beyond Greek life, numerous spirit organizations, athletic groups, and academic clubs contribute to the rich tapestry of student involvement. For Fannin County families, UT is a prestigious choice, and ensuring student safety here is paramount.

5.3.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

The University of Texas at Austin has a comprehensive anti-hazing policy that strictly prohibits hazing by any student or student organization. Its policy aligns with state law, covering physical, mental, and digital hazing, whether on or off campus. UT stands out for its public “Hazing Violations” page (hazing.utexas.edu), which lists organizations, the nature of violations, and the sanctions imposed. This level of transparency offers invaluable insight for prospective students, parents, and legal counsel. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students, the Office of Student Conduct, and the UT Austin Police Department (UTPD).

5.3.3 Selected documented incidents & responses

UT Austin’s public hazing log showcases numerous incidents across various types of organizations. Examples include:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ) (2023): The chapter was disciplined for hazing acts including directing new members to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics. The university found this to be hazing and placed the chapter on probation, requiring additional hazing-prevention education. The national organization has a notorious national hazing history (see Section 6), making such local incidents particularly concerning and legally impactful.
• Texas Wranglers (2020s and prior): This well-known spirit organization has repeatedly been sanctioned for hazing violations, including forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, and other punishment-based practices designed to humiliate and degrade new members. Their repeated appearance on the hazing log highlights the persistent challenge of addressing hazing, even with public transparency.
• “Absolute Texxas” Spirit Group (2022): This group was disciplined for hazing violations involving alcohol/drug misconduct, blindfolding, forced transportation (kidnapping), and other degrading treatment of new members. This reinforces that hazing is not exclusive to Greek life but can permeate various student groups.

These documented incidents, publicly available, serve as crucial evidence for Fannin County families seeking accountability, as they establish a clear pattern of problematic behavior and the university’s prior knowledge of hazing risks.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin hazing case might proceed

For families from Fannin County, a hazing incident at UT Austin would typically navigate courts with jurisdiction over Travis County (where Austin is located). Criminal investigations might involve the UTPD or the Austin Police Department. Potential defendants include individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially the University of Texas at Austin as a state agency (subject to sovereign immunity but with applicable exceptions). The presence of UT’s public hazing log is a powerful tool in civil litigation, providing concrete evidence of prior violations, university knowledge, and pattern of conduct that can support claims of negligence and foreseeability.

5.3.5 What UT Austin students & parents should do

If you’re a Fannin County parent with a child at UT Austin, or a student there, here are key steps:

• Consult the UT Hazing Violations Log: Regularly check hazing.utexas.edu before your child joins any organization. Prior violations are a major red flag.
• Utilize UT’s Reporting System: Confidently use the anonymous reporting channels or contact the Dean of Students / UTPD. The public reporting system suggests greater accountability.
• Document Evidence Diligently: Given UT’s proactive reporting, any evidence you collect (texts, photos from Appendix D) will be critical to supplement or verify university findings.
• Understand Legal Precedents: Recognize that the national cases involving organizations like Pi Kappa Alpha or Sigma Alpha Epsilon directly apply to their chapters at UT, establishing a history of risk that the national organizations (and often the university) should have been aware of.
• Consult a Texas Hazing Lawyer: An attorney experienced with the legal landscape in Austin and against UT can leverage public records and national precedents to build a strong case for justice.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University (SMU), a private institution located in Dallas, is recognized for its beautiful campus, academic rigor, and a vibrant social scene often centered around its robust Greek life. Students from various Texas communities, including some from Fannin County, choose SMU for its distinctive educational and social environment. Given its private status and strong Greek presence, hazing incidents here warrant careful attention.

5.4.1 Campus & culture snapshot

SMU fosters a collegiate atmosphere with a significant emphasis on Greek life, which plays a central role in social activities and campus leadership. The university appeals to students seeking a dynamic private university experience in a major urban setting like Dallas. For Fannin County families, SMU offers a strong academic reputation and a lively campus culture, but it’s important to be aware of the specific challenges regarding student safety and hazing within its Greek system.

5.4.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

SMU maintains a strict anti-hazing policy that aligns with Texas state law, applying to all student organizations, on or off campus. The university explicitly prohibits conduct that endangers mental or physical health for initiation or affiliation purposes. SMU offers a variety of reporting options, including the Dean of Students Office, Student Conduct & Community Standards, and the SMU Police Department. They also use anonymous reporting systems, such as the Real Response platform, to encourage students to come forward without fear of retaliation.

5.4.3 Selected documented incidents & responses

Like other major universities, SMU has had its share of hazing incidents prompting disciplinary action:

• Kappa Alpha Order (ΚΑ) Incident (2017): This national fraternity, which has a significant presence at SMU, faced university suspension and restrictions after allegations of severe hazing. Reports indicated that new members were paddled, forced to consume excessive alcohol, and deprived of sleep. The SMU chapter was prevented from recruiting new members for several years (until around 2021), reflecting a serious response from the university.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ): While not specific to SMU, this national fraternity has a presence on campus and a well-documented national history of hazing, including incidents involving alcohol poisoning and physical abuse at other universities (see Section 6). Any hazing incidents involving SAE at SMU would carry the weight of this national pattern.

These incidents highlight that even at private universities with extensive resources, hazing remains a persistent issue, and the university’s response can be crucial for preventing future harm.

5.4.4 How an SMU hazing case might proceed

For Fannin County families dealing with a hazing incident at SMU, legal proceedings would typically fall under the jurisdiction of Dallas County courts. Criminal investigations would involve the SMU Police Department or the Dallas Police Department. A key difference with private institutions like SMU is that they generally have fewer immunity protections compared to public universities. This means that SMU itself could be a more direct target for civil lawsuits based on negligence, negligent supervision, or failure to enforce policies. Potential defendants would include individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and potentially the university and property owners.

5.4.5 What SMU students & parents should do

If you’re a Fannin County parent with a child at SMU, or a student there, consider these actions if hazing is suspected:

• Leverage Private Reporting Systems: Utilize SMU’s anonymous reporting options like Real Response, which may offer a degree of comfort for students fearing reprisal.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: Given that private university disciplinary records may not be as publicly transparent as those from state schools, meticulous personal documentation of evidence (screenshots, photos, witness contacts) becomes even more crucial.
• Understand Private vs. Public University Differences: Be aware that the legal strategies and the types of claims pursued against a private institution like SMU may differ from those against public universities, as private schools typically have less robust immunity defenses.
• Seek Experienced Legal Counsel: An attorney with experience in hazing litigation against private universities in Dallas County can navigate the complexities of SMU’s policies and legal standing, and effectively pursue justice for victims.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Christian university in Waco, holds a unique place in Texas higher education. Its strong religious affiliation, high academic standards, and prominent athletic programs attract students from across the state, including families in Fannin County. However, Baylor’s history, marked by past scandals related to sexual assault and institutional oversight in its athletic department, casts a long shadow, underscoring the critical need for vigilance regarding all forms of student abuse, including hazing.

5.1.1 Campus & culture snapshot

Baylor University offers a distinctive educational and spiritual environment in Central Texas. The university is known for its strong community, passionate alumni base, and commitment to its Christian mission. Greek life, while present, operates within specific guidelines reflective of the university’s values, alongside numerous other student organizations and highly competitive athletic programs. For Fannin County families, Baylor represents a blend of tradition, faith, and academic opportunity.

5.1.2 Official hazing policy & reporting channels

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing, articulating a zero-tolerance policy that aligns with Texas state law. Their policy applies to all university-sanctioned organizations, on or off campus, and includes any act that causes mental or physical harm for initiation or membership. Baylor emphasizes reporting through its Office of Student Conduct, the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD), and various confidential reporting options, often touting a commitment to student safety and ethical conduct.

5.1.3 Selected documented incidents & responses

Baylor’s institutional culture has been under intense scrutiny in recent years, particularly concerning allegations of sexual assault and a perceived failure to adequately respond. While hazing is a distinct issue, the patterns of institutional oversight—or lack thereof—can often overlap.

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): Following an internal investigation, 14 players from Baylor’s baseball team were suspended due to hazing violations. The university staggered the suspensions over the early part of the season, reflecting a disciplinary response to reports of misconduct within the athletic program. This incident, while not fatal, reinforced that hazing is present across various student groups at Baylor, including prestigious athletic teams.
• National Fraternity/Sorority Histories: With chapters of major national fraternities like Pi Kappa Alpha, Phi Delta Theta, and Sigma Chi present at Baylor, the well-documented national histories of hazing connected to these organizations (as detailed in Section 6) remain a significant concern, placing a burden on both the local chapter and the national body to prevent similar incidents.

These incidents highlight the ongoing challenge for Baylor in ensuring student safety across its diverse organizations, particularly given its strong athletic programs and the broader context of its institutional history.

5.1.4 How a Baylor hazing case might proceed

For Fannin County families pursuing a hazing claim at Baylor, legal proceedings would typically occur in courts with jurisdiction over McLennan County (where Waco is located). Criminal investigations could involve the BUPD or the Waco Police Department. As a private university, Baylor generally has fewer state-level immunity protections than public institutions, making it potentially more vulnerable to direct civil claims based on negligence, negligent supervision, or failure to protect students. Potential defendants would include individual students, the local chapter, the National organization, and potentially the university and property owners.

5.1.5 What Baylor students & parents should do

If you’re a Fannin County parent with a child at Baylor, or a student yourself, here are important steps if hazing is suspected:

• Understand Baylor’s Specific Policies: Familiarize yourself with the university’s anti-hazing policies and reporting procedures, which may be influenced by its private and religious affiliations.
• Document Diligently: Given the potential for less public transparency of some internal investigations compared to state universities, thoroughly document all physical, digital, and witness evidence.
• Recognize Overlapping Concerns: Understand that Baylor’s history of institutional oversight issues carries weight; legal strategies for hazing cases here may draw parallels to arguments developed in prior cases of institutional negligence.
• Prioritize Safety and Confidentiality: If you or your child report internally, be mindful of potential implications and consider legal counsel early to protect your rights and privacy.
• Contact a Texas Hazing Lawyer: An attorney experienced in hazing lawsuits against private institutions and within the Waco legal environment can provide crucial guidance, helping to navigate Baylor’s unique institutional context.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

Understanding the history of hazing within specific national fraternities and sororities is vital for Fannin County families seeking accountability. When a local chapter at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor commits a hazing infraction, it rarely occurs in isolation. It’s often part of a disturbing pattern of behavior seen across many chapters nationwide, indicating a systemic issue that the national organization has a legal and moral obligation to address.

6.1 Why National Histories Matter

Many fraternities and sororities present on Texas campuses are part of larger national organizations. These national headquarters are not merely symbolic entities; they:

• Dictate policies, including anti-hazing rules.
• Collect dues and provide training.
• Have oversight responsibilities for their local chapters.
• Critically, they often have extensive knowledge of prior hazing incidents, injuries, and deaths that have occurred within their system because they’ve been sued, settled cases, and investigated chapters across the country.

When a local chapter in Texas repeats hazing behaviors that have led to suspensions, litigation, or even deaths elsewhere, it undermines any national organization’s claim of ignorance. This pattern of conduct is crucial for establishing foreseeability in a legal case, arguing that the national organization knew or should have known of the risks and failed to take adequate preventative measures. This can significantly strengthen negligence or punitive damages arguments against these national entities.

6.2 Organization Mapping: National Patterns Connected to Texas Chapters

While we cannot list every chapter and every incident, a clear pattern emerges with certain national fraternities that have repeatedly been linked to severe hazing. Many of these organizations have chapters thriving at the universities where families from Fannin County send their children.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): This national fraternity has chapters at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, and the University of Texas at Austin, and Baylor. Its national history is unfortunately marred by tragic hazing-related deaths and severe injuries, most notably the death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University in 2021 (resulting in a $10 million settlement), and David Bogenberger’s death at Northern Illinois University in 2012 (resulting in a $14 million settlement). These cases, often involving forced alcohol consumption during “Big/Little” events, demonstrate a repeated dangerous pattern that national Pike has been on notice of for years. The recent local incident at UT Austin in 2023 for similar alcohol-related hazing highlights this ongoing risk.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): With chapters at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, and SMU, SAE has a particularly notorious national hazing history. This includes cases of traumatic brain injury during hazing rituals (University of Alabama, 2023), and the horrifying incident at Texas A&M in 2021 where pledges suffered severe chemical burns from industrial cleaner poured on them. In 2014, SAE made a public declaration to eliminate their traditional pledge process due to a pattern of deaths and serious injuries nationwide. Yet, hazing incidents persist, demonstrating that policy changes alone are not enough without rigorous enforcement and a culture shift.

• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): Chapters are active at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor. This national fraternity was famously tied to the death of Max Gruver at Louisiana State University in 2017, an alcohol poisoning incident during a “Bible study” drinking game, which led to the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana and a $6.1 million verdict later in civil litigation. The national organization has been on notice about the dangers of such drinking games within its chapters.

• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Present at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, and UT Austin. Pi Kappa Phi was involved in the death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University in 2017, another tragic alcohol poisoning case stemming from a “Big Brother Night.” This incident and others show a recurring problem with excessive alcohol consumption in their initiation events nationally.

• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): With chapters at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, and Baylor, Beta Theta Pi gained national infamy with the death of Timothy Piazza at Penn State University in 2017. This horrific case of delayed medical care after extreme forced drinking led to one of the largest hazing prosecutions in U.S. history and widespread anti-hazing legislation. The severity of this incident cannot be understated when evaluating the liability of this national organization.

• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Chapters are found at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, and Baylor. This national fraternity was implicated in the drowning death of Chad Meredith at the University of Miami in 2001, resulting in a $12.6 million jury verdict based on hazing charges. This historic precedent established significant liability for the organization during initiation activities. More recently, Kappa Sigma has faced allegations of physical hazing at Texas A&M (ongoing since 2023) resulting in injuries like rhabdomyolysis, demonstrating that different forms of aggressive hazing persist within its chapters.

• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Active at the University of Houston, Texas A&M University, UT Austin, and Baylor. Sigma Chi has also faced substantial hazing litigation. In 2024, a family received more than $10 million in damages following allegations of physical beatings, forced drug/alcohol consumption, and psychological torment at their College of Charleston chapter. This significant settlement underscores the severe financial consequences imposed on organizations for egregious hazing and the lasting harm inflicted on victims.

• Multicultural & NPHC Organizations: While often excluded from the mainstream media’s “hazing crisis” narrative, groups within the National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) and Multicultural Greek Councils also face challenges. Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ), present at UH and Texas A&M among others, has been involved in serious hazing allegations, including reports of severe beatings with wooden paddles and injuries requiring surgery (University of Southern Mississippi, 2023). Alpha Phi Alpha (ΑΦΑ), another prominent NPHC fraternity at UH, Texas A&M, and UT, has a history of physical hazing allegations (e.g., Cornell University, 1995, with a pledge developing a life-threatening infection from paddling). It is critical for Fannin County families to understand that hazing occurs across the Greek spectrum.

6.3 Tie Back to Legal Strategy

This extensive national history is not just for context; it forms a cornerstone of our legal strategy. These patterns demonstrate:

• Foreseeability: National organizations cannot credibly claim they were unaware of the dangers posed by specific hazing practices like forced drinking or violent rituals. They have been warned, sued, and paid damages before.
• Deficient Risk Management: Their repeated failures to prevent these incidents indicate a breakdown in their anti-hazing policies, training, and enforcement. This can expose them to claims of negligent supervision, even if the local chapter acted in direct defiance of written rules.
• Insurance Coverage: While insurers often try to deny coverage for “intentional acts” like hazing, the argument that the national organization was negligent in its oversight (a covered event) can compel them to pay for settlements and defense costs, a strategy we know well from our firm’s experience with former insurance defense attorney Lupe Peña.
• Punitive Damages: When an organization demonstrates a pattern of ignoring warnings and showing reckless indifference to the safety of its pledges, it significantly strengthens the argument for punitive damages—compensation intended to punish and deter future egregious conduct.

For Fannin County residents, this means that even if a hazing incident at a Texas campus does not make national headlines, the national organization involved is already operating within a well-established history of liability. The Manginello Law Firm leverages this knowledge to tirelessly advocate for our clients.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

The path to justice for hazing victims and their families in Fannin County requires a meticulous approach to evidence collection, a deep understanding of potential damages, and a sophisticated legal strategy. When we take on a hazing case, we operate with the relentless investigative depth that characterized our firm’s involvement in complex matters like the BP Texas City explosion litigation, applying the same rigor to uncovering the truth behind campus abuse.

7.1 Evidence: The Foundation of a Strong Claim

Modern hazing cases are often won or lost based on the quality and volume of the evidence. Unlike traditional personal injury cases, hazing frequently takes place in secret, making expert investigative techniques critical.

• Digital Communications: The New Smoking Gun: In 2025, group chats and direct messages are frequently the most powerful form of evidence.

  • Platforms: We target evidence from GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Snapchat, Instagram DMs, TikTok, and any fraternity/sorority-specific apps.
  • Content: These chats reveal planning, intent, knowledge of hazing, specific instructions, patterns of abuse, and who was involved. They show conversations before, during, and after incidents.
  • Preservation is Key: The Manginello Law Firm’s video on using your cellphone to document a legal case (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) explains how to properly screenshot full threads with timestamps and participant names, and why it’s critical to avoid deleting anything. Even “disappearing” messages (like on Snapchat) need to be captured immediately through screenshots or screen recordings. Deleted messages can often be recovered by digital forensics experts working with experienced attorneys, but original, unedited captures are always best.

• Photos & Videos: Visual evidence is incredibly compelling.

  • Member-Generated Content: Photos and videos taken by members themselves during hazing events, often shared in private group chats or on social media, provide undeniable proof.
  • Surveillance Footage: Security cameras at off-campus houses, Ring/doorbell footage at residences, or even campus security cameras can capture critical moments, showing who was present, who was injured, and the overall atmosphere.

• Internal Organization Documents: These documents can expose the hypocrisy between stated anti-hazing policies and actual chapter practices.

  • Pledge Manuals/Initiation Scripts: These sometimes contain euphemistic language for hazing or reveal problematic “traditions.”
  • Emails/Texts: Communications between officers, or between local and national leadership, often contain casual admissions or discussions of “new member education” that is, in fact, hazing.
  • National Policies/Training: These voluminous documents are critical for demonstrating that the national organization had knowledge of hazing risks but failed to adequately enforce its rules.

• University Records: Open records laws and discovery in lawsuits can unlock crucial institutional knowledge.

  • Prior Conduct Files: Documents detailing previous hazing violations, probations, or suspensions involving the same organization at the university prove prior knowledge.
  • Incident Reports: Reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices related to the organization or individuals can be vital.
  • Clery Reports: These mandatory federal disclosures can show aggregated patterns of crime, including assaults and alcohol violations, that often overlap with hazing.
  • Administrative Communications: Internal university emails and memos can reveal if administrators were aware of hazing concerns and how they responded (or failed to respond).

• Medical and Psychological Records: These documents objectively detail the harm suffered.

  • Emergency Room & Hospitalization Records: Critical for documenting physical injuries, diagnosis, and treatment for conditions like alcohol poisoning, broken bones, or rhabdomyolysis.
  • Toxicology Reports: Confirm presence and levels of alcohol or drugs.
  • Psychological Evaluations: Crucial for documenting non-physical harm such as PTSD, depression, anxiety, humiliation, and other forms of emotional distress resulting from hazing.

• Witness Testimony: The accounts of individuals who saw, heard, or participated in the hazing are invaluable.

  • Pledges/Members: Other new members, or even current members, can provide firsthand accounts.
  • Bystanders: Roommates, RAs, coaches, trainers, or other students who observed suspicious behavior.
  • Former Members: Individuals who quit or were expelled often have key insights and may be willing to cooperate.

7.2 Damages: Compensating for Profound Harm

Hazing often inflicts deep, multifaceted harm. Our firm meticulously assesses all potential categories of damages to ensure our Fannin County clients receive full and fair compensation for their losses.

• Economic Damages (Quantifiable Financial Losses):

  • Medical Expenses: This includes immediate costs (ambulance, ER, ICU), ongoing treatment (surgeries, physical therapy, medications), and long-term care for catastrophic injuries, such as specialized care for brain damage or organ damage.
  • Lost Earnings/Educational Impact: This accounts for missed semesters, delayed graduation, loss of scholarships, and, most critically, diminished future earning capacity if injuries lead to permanent disabilities or psychological trauma that impacts career trajectory. We work with expert economists to project these lifetime losses.

• Non-Economic Damages (Subjective, but Legally Compensable):

  • Physical Pain and Suffering: Compensation for the direct physical pain from injuries and any ongoing discomfort.
  • Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: This includes trauma, humiliation, profound anxiety, depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and other psychological impacts that often linger long after the physical wounds heal. The constant fear, nightmares, and loss of trust are legitimate and compensable harms.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: When hazing robs a student of their college experience, their ability to pursue hobbies, or their normal social life, this is a distinct and compensable loss.
  • Loss of Companionship (Wrongful Death): In the most tragic cases, families from Fannin County can seek compensation for the immeasurable loss of their child’s guidance, love, and companionship.

• Punitive Damages: In cases of extreme recklessness, malice, or gross negligence, courts may award punitive damages. These are not intended to compensate the victim but rather to punish the responsible parties and deter similar conduct in the future. Texas law outlines specific criteria for awarding punitive damages, which we aggressively pursue when warranted to ensure maximum accountability.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

A key part of our strategy involves identifying every potentially liable party and navigating the complex world of insurance coverage. Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, brings invaluable insight as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She understands how insurance companies (for fraternities, universities, and individuals) try to minimize payouts, invoke “intentional act” exclusions, or claim lack of coverage.

Our team knows how to:

• Uncover All Policies: Identify every relevant insurance policy that could provide coverage, from chapter policies to national organization policies and university umbrella policies.
• Challenge Exclusions: Argue that even if hazing involved intentional acts, the university’s or national organization’s negligent supervision or failure to act was a separate, covered event.
• Force Insurers to Defend: Compel insurance companies to fulfill their duty to defend the insured party, making funds available for settlement or judgment.
• Negotiate Strategically: Leverage our inside knowledge of insurer tactics to negotiate from a position of strength, always prepared to take a case to trial if a fair offer isn’t made.

Our firm doesn’t just chase quick settlements; we build comprehensive cases that anticipate defense tactics and maximize our Fannin County clients’ chances for full justice.

Practical Guides & FAQs

We understand the immediate need for clear, actionable advice when hazing impacts a family in Fannin County. Here are practical guides for parents, students, and even former members who wish to come forward, along with answers to frequently asked questions.

8.1 For Parents in Fannin County

Your role is critical. Trust your instincts and act decisively if you suspect hazing.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert for these indicators:

  • Physical Changes: Unexplained bruises, cuts, burns, or injuries (especially if excuses seem fabricated). Extreme fatigue, drastic weight loss or gain, constant sleep deprivation. Signs of alcohol poisoning or drug use, or unusual skin conditions.
  • Behavioral & Emotional Shifts: Sudden secrecy about chapter activities (“I can’t talk about it”). Withdrawal from family or old friends. Increased anxiety, depression, irritability, or anger. Defensiveness when asked about the organization. Talking about “just getting through this” or “everyone did it before me.”
  • Academic Red Flags: Unexpected drops in grades, missing classes, or falling asleep due to “mandatory” late-night events.
  • Financial Red Flags: Sudden, unexplained large expenses, requests for money without clear justification, or buying excessive items for older members.
  • Digital Obsession: Constant phone use for group chats, anxiety when the phone pings, obsessive deletion of messages, or new geo-tracking apps.

• How to Talk to Your Child:

  • Ask Open-Ended Questions: “How are things really going with the fraternity/sorority? Are you enjoying it?”
  • Listen Without Judgment: Emphasize that their safety and well-being are your highest priority, not “getting them in trouble.”
  • Reassure Them: Ensure they know you will support them regardless of what they say, and that “earning” respect via abuse is never acceptable.

• If Your Child is Hurt or Admits to Hazing:

  • Prioritize Medical Care: Get immediate medical attention, documenting all injuries and connecting them to hazing in medical records.
  • Document Everything (Appendix D): This cannot be stressed enough. Take photos of injuries, screenshot messages, and write down every detail (who, what, when, where) while it’s fresh.
  • Secure Evidence: Save any receipts for forced purchases, physical items, or damaged property.
  • Dealing with the University: Document all communications. An experienced attorney can guide you on when and how to engage with university administrators.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer:

  • If your child has experienced any significant physical or psychological harm.
  • If you feel the university, chapter, or national organization is minimizing, ignoring, or covering up what happened.
  • Before signing any documents or making any public statements.

8.2 For Students / Pledges in Fannin County

You have rights, and your safety is paramount. Do not believe you “consented” to being abused.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition?

  • Ask yourself: Am I being forced or pressured to do something I don’t want to do? Is this activity dangerous, degrading, embarrassing, or illegal? Would older members do this themselves? Would my parents or the university approve? Am I being told to keep secrets? If you answer yes to any of these, it is hazing. The three-tier classification in Appendix A (Subtle, Harassment, Violent Hazing) can help you identify specific behaviors.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story:

  • Texas law (Education Code § 37.155) explicitly states consent is not a defense to hazing. Your desire to belong, to fit in, or fear of exclusion creates a coercive environment where true voluntary consent is impossible. You are the victim, not the willing participant, in such scenarios.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely:

  • If in Immediate Danger: Call 911. Get to a safe place (dorm, friend’s house, public area). Remember, you won’t get in trouble for calling for help in an emergency due to good-faith reporter protections.
  • To Quit/De-Pledge: You have the legal right to leave at any time. Inform someone outside the organization (parent, RA, trusted friend). Send an email or text message to the chapter president/new member educator stating you are resigning immediately. Do not agree to “one last meeting” alone.
  • Reporting Options (Appendix C): Utilize campus authorities (Dean of Students, Title IX Coordinator if applicable, campus police), local police if crimes occurred, or the National Anti-Hazing Hotline: 1-888-NOT-HAZE. Also, consider a confidential consultation with a hazing lawyer.

• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty:

  • Texas law and many university policies protect students who, acting in good faith, seek medical assistance for someone experiencing a drug or alcohol overdose, even if they were involved in the hazing or underage drinking. Do not let fear of personal punishment delay calling for help.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

Your input can prevent future tragedies and bring closure to victims from Fannin County and beyond.

• Acknowledge Your Role: We understand that being a former member or witness can bring feelings of guilt, fear of repercussions, or internal conflict. However, your insights and potential testimony can be instrumental in holding perpetrators accountable and stopping preventable harm.
• Your Information is Powerful: Details about specific hazing rituals, internal communications, or the culture of silence can be crucial evidence that organizations try to hide.
• Seek Legal Advice: If you have concerns about your own legal exposure, contacting an attorney can help you understand your rights and options for cooperating, while protecting your interests. Sometimes, prosecutors or civil plaintiffs offer opportunities for cooperation in exchange for reduced liability or immunity.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

Protecting your child from hazing requires vigilance, and pursuing justice requires careful strategy. Based on our firm’s experience, families often make critical, unintentional mistakes that can severely damage their legal position. It’s important for Fannin County families to be aware of these pitfalls:

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

   • The Mistake: Believing it will protect your child from getting into more trouble, or simply not realizing the legal significance, families allow or instruct students to delete group chats, texts, or social media posts.
   • Why It’s Wrong: This can appear as evidence tampering, can destroy crucial proof of hazing, and can make proving your case nearly impossible. Digital forensics can sometimes recover deleted data, but original, unedited screenshots are invaluable.
   • What to Do Instead: If a hazing incident has occurred, immediately back up all digital communications (texts, group chats, social media) without editing or deleting anything. Our firm’s video on using your cell phone to document a legal case (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) provides essential guidance on this.

2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly:

   • The Mistake: Naturally, parents are outraged and want to confront the individuals or the organization responsible.
   • Why It’s Wrong: This often results in the immediate destruction of evidence, coaching of witnesses, and the organization hiring its own legal counsel, putting you at a severe disadvantage.
   • What to Do Instead: Document everything privately, then contact an experienced hazing attorney BEFORE any direct confrontation.

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

   • The Mistake: Universities, under pressure to manage PR and avoid lawsuits, may offer quick internal resolutions or ask parents to sign waivers.
   • Why It’s Wrong: These documents can legally waive your child’s right to pursue a civil lawsuit, and internal settlements are often far below the true value of the case.
   • What to Do Instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or the organization without an attorney thoroughly reviewing it first.

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

   • The Mistake: Wanting to alert others or vent frustration, families sometimes post details of an incident on public social media.
   • Why It’s Wrong: Defense attorneys will screenshot every post, potentially using any inconsistencies to attack credibility, or arguing that public disclosure waives certain legal privileges or damages.
   • What to Do Instead: Keep all details strictly confidential between your family and your attorney. Let your legal team control any necessary public messaging.

5. Letting Your Child Go Back to “One Last Meeting” or Discussion:

   • The Mistake: The organization may try to “talk things out” with your child, promising reconciliation or claiming it’s just to “understand what happened.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: These meetings are often designed to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can later be used against your child in disciplinary or legal proceedings.
   • What to Do Instead: Once you are considering legal action, advise your child to cease all direct communication with the organization. All future contact should go through your attorney.

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

   • The Mistake: Relying solely on the university’s internal investigative process, parents delay seeking legal counsel.
   • Why It’s Wrong: Evidence vanishes, witnesses graduate and become harder to track down, and the statute of limitations continues to run. Universities, even with good intentions, prioritize institutional reputation and may only impose internal disciplinary actions, which do not provide compensation for victims. Additionally, the university’s internal process does not always equate to true, independent accountability.
   • What to Do Instead: Preserve evidence immediately and consult with a hazing attorney concurrently with any university investigation. Our video on whether there’s a statute of limitations on your case (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c) emphasizes why time is critical.

7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer:

   • The Mistake: Believing the insurance adjuster is there to help, families give recorded statements or accept initial settlement offers.
   • Why It’s Wrong: Adjusters work for the insurance company, whose goal is to minimize payouts. Recorded statements can be used against you, and early offers are almost always lowball.
   • What to Do Instead: Politely decline to speak with any insurance adjuster and refer them to your attorney. As our firm’s video on how contingency fees work (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc) clarifies, legal representation often comes at no upfront cost to 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, and UT Austin benefit from some sovereign immunity protections under Texas law, but exceptions exist for cases involving gross negligence, willful misconduct, or certain Title IX violations. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case is unique, and outcomes depend on specific facts. We strongly encourage Fannin County families to contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  Yes, it can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default. However, it becomes a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who fail to report hazing when they have knowledge of it 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 prosecution for hazing. The law recognizes that “consent” given under peer pressure, a power imbalance, or the fear of social exclusion is not true voluntary consent. Your child is a victim, regardless of perceived “agreement.”

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”
  Generally, there is a two-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known, especially in cases with cover-ups or fraud. Given that evidence disappears and memories fade, time is critically important. We urge families to call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately for guidance.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities/sororities can still be liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and the foreseeability of hazing occurring off-campus. Many major hazing cases that resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments (like the Pi Delta Psi retreat case) occurred at off-campus or private locations.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  The vast majority of hazing cases are resolved through confidential settlements before a trial. If desired, our firm can take steps to request sealed court records and confidential settlement terms, prioritizing your family’s privacy while still pursuing accountability. While some families choose to share their story publicly to foster awareness, the decision is always yours.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family in Fannin County faces the devastating impact of hazing, you need more than just a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who intimately understand how powerful institutions—national fraternities, wealthy universities, and their insurers—fight back, and possess the unique expertise to cut through their defenses and win.

We are The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, known as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™. From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Fannin County and communities sending students to universities across the state. We’ve built our reputation on fiercely advocating for victims of serious injury, wrongful death, and institutional negligence, pursuing justice where others might falter.

Our firm brings unique qualifications to hazing cases:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, honed her skills as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She knows precisely how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and often undervalue) hazing claims. She understands their delay tactics, their coverage exclusion arguments, and their settlement strategies because she used to run their playbook. This gives our Fannin County clients an unparalleled edge in navigating insurance disputes and maximizing recovery.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Ralph Manginello, our managing partner, has an extensive track record in complex litigation, including being one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation. His experience in federal court, particularly in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, means he is not intimidated by national fraternities, multi-billion-dollar universities, or their formidable defense teams. We’ve taken on powerful corporations and won; we apply that same tenacity to fighting for hazing victims.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We don’t just handle cases; we build cases that force accountability. Our firm has a proven track record in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases, working with economists to value life-long losses and pursuing compensation for lifetime care needs in severe brain injury or permanent disability cases. We don’t settle cheap; we prepare for trial to ensure justice.
• Criminal and Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides us with invaluable insight into how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. We can effectively advise witnesses and former members who may face dual exposure, allowing for comprehensive counsel that tackles both aspects of a hazing case.
• Relentless Investigative Depth: We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does. Our investigations leverage a network of experts, including digital forensics specialists to recover deleted group chats and social media evidence, medical experts to assess long-term injuries, and psychologists to document emotional trauma. We know how to uncover prior incidents by subpoenaing national fraternity records and how to obtain critical university files through discovery.

We profoundly understand the profound emotional and physical toll hazing takes on students and their families in Fannin County. Our job is to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We are not about bravado or quick settlements; we are about thorough investigation, strategic advocacy, and achieving real accountability.

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

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

You can expect that during your free consultation, we will:

• Listen to your story without judgment and with deep empathy.
• Review any evidence you currently have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• Clearly explain your legal options, whether that involves a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• Discuss realistic timelines and what to expect during the legal process.
• Answer all your questions about our costs, explaining how our contingency fee basis means we don’t get paid unless we win your case.
• There is absolutely no pressure to hire us on the spot; we encourage you to take the time you need to decide.
• Everything you tell us remains strictly confidential.

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

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

Hablamos Español – Contact Lupe Peña directly for a consultation in Spanish at 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