The Complete Guide to Hazing Injuries & Lawsuits for Grapeland, Texas Families

If Your Child Was Hazed at a Texas University, You Are Not Alone

For parents in Grapeland, Crockett, and across Houston County, sending your child to college represents years of hard work, hope, and sacrifice. You imagine them gaining an education, building lifelong friendships, and preparing for their future. The last thing you expect is that they could be systematically abused, injured, or humiliated by the very organizations promising to welcome them into campus life.

Right now, in our own state, we’re fighting one of the most serious hazing cases in the country. In late 2025, we filed a $10 million hazing and abuse lawsuit on behalf of Leonel Bermudez, a University of Houston student who pledged the Pi Kappa Phi Beta Nu chapter. The alleged conduct is shocking in its cruelty: forced humiliating “fanny pack” rules, extreme physical workouts, being sprayed in the face with a hose “similar to waterboarding,” forced consumption of milk and hot dogs until vomiting, and finally, a November 3rd “workout” of over 100 push-ups and 500 squats that left him with rhabdomyolysis and acute kidney failure. His urine was brown. He was hospitalized for four days. The chapter has been shut down, but the physical and psychological harm continues.

This is not an isolated incident from some distant state. This happened right here in Texas, at a public university less than three hours from Grapeland. If this can happen at UH, it can happen anywhere your child attends school—whether at Texas A&M University (which many Grapeland and Houston County students attend), the University of Texas at Austin, or any of Texas’s 96 campuses with Greek life.

This comprehensive guide is written specifically for Grapeland families and parents throughout East Texas who need to understand:

1. What hazing really looks like in 2025—beyond the old stereotypes
2. How Texas law protects (or fails) your child and what legal options exist
3. What’s happening at Texas universities where Grapeland students enroll
4. How national fraternity histories create predictable, repeating patterns of injury
5. What to do immediately if you suspect or discover hazing
6. Why experienced Texas hazing litigation counsel matters against universities and national organizations with unlimited legal budgets

If you’re reading this because you’re worried about your child, trust that instinct. What follows is based on 25+ years of complex litigation experience, insider knowledge of how institutions cover up hazing, and a commitment to holding every responsible party accountable—from individual students to national headquarters to the universities that enable them.

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:

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

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours. Evidence disappears fast—deleted group chats, destroyed paddles, coached witnesses. Universities move quickly to control the narrative. We can help preserve evidence and protect your child’s rights.

Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

Many Grapeland parents remember hazing as “pranks” or “initiation traditions.” What’s happening today is more systematic, more dangerous, and better hidden than ever before. Modern hazing isn’t about harmless fun—it’s about power, control, and tradition that repeatedly leads to hospitalization, permanent injury, and death.

The Three Tiers of Modern Hazing

Tier 1: Subtle Hazing (The “Gateway”)
These behaviors establish power imbalance and set the stage for escalation:

• 24/7 digital control: Constant GroupMe/WhatsApp demands, required instant responses, sleep disruption via phone notifications
• Servitude requirements: Acting as designated drivers at all hours, cleaning members’ rooms, running personal errands
• Social isolation: Cutting off contact with non-members, requiring permission for social activities
• “Voluntary” mandatory events: Late-night “study sessions” or “meetings” that interfere with academics

Tier 2: Harassment Hazing (The Abuse)
These cause measurable physical or psychological harm:

• Sleep deprivation: 3 AM wake-up calls for “workouts,” multi-day events with minimal rest
• Food/water manipulation: Forced consumption of spoiled food, excessive amounts of bland substances (like gallons of milk), or complete deprivation
• Extreme calisthenics: “Smokings” with hundreds of push-ups, wall sits until collapse, sprinting until vomiting
• Public humiliation: Forced embarrassing performances, wearing degrading costumes, “roasting” sessions

Tier 3: Violent Hazing (The Catastrophe)
These have high potential for permanent injury or death:

• Forced alcohol consumption: “Bible study” drinking games, “Big/Little” nights with handles of liquor, forced chugging competitions
• Physical beatings: Paddling, punching, kicking—often framed as “tradition”
• Dangerous “tests”: Blindfolded tackle rituals (“glass ceiling”), forced fights, swimming while intoxicated
• Sexualized hazing: Forced nudity, simulated sexual acts, sexual assault
• Chemical exposure: Texas A&M SAE case where pledges were covered in industrial cleaner causing chemical burns requiring skin grafts

The Digital Evolution of Hazing

What makes 2025 hazing particularly dangerous is how technology enables both abuse and cover-up:

Digital Humiliation & Control:

• Group chat dares and challenges shared across Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok
• Forced creation of compromising content that can be used as blackmail
• Location tracking via Find My Friends or Life360 to monitor pledges 24/7
• Social media policing—controlling what pledges can post or share

Evidence Destruction Systems:

• Signal/Telegram messages that auto-delete
• “Burner” phones for planning hazing events
• Coaching on what to say (and not say) in digital communications
• Systematic deletion of evidence after incidents

For Grapeland parents, understanding this digital landscape is crucial. The evidence that could prove your child’s case lives on smartphones—and disappears within hours if not preserved.

Texas Hazing Law: What Grapeland Families Need to Know

Texas has specific anti-hazing laws, but they’re only as strong as their enforcement. Here’s what every Grapeland parent should understand about the legal landscape.

Texas Education Code Chapter 37: The Hazing Statute

§ 37.151 Definition:
Hazing means any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, directed against a student that:

1. Endangers mental or physical health or safety, AND
2. Occurs for pledging, initiation, affiliation, holding office, or maintaining membership in any student organization

Key Points for Texas Families:

• Location doesn’t matter: On-campus, off-campus, at retreats—all are covered
• “Consent is NOT a defense” (§ 37.155): Even if your child “agreed,” it’s still hazing under Texas law
• Mental harm counts: Psychological abuse qualifies alongside physical injury

§ 37.152 Criminal Penalties:

• Class B Misdemeanor: Basic hazing (up to 180 days jail, $2,000 fine)
• Class A Misdemeanor: Hazing causing injury requiring medical treatment
• State Jail Felony: Hazing causing serious bodily injury or death

§ 37.153 Organizational Liability:
Fraternities, sororities, and other organizations can be:

• Fined up to $10,000 per violation
• Sued for civil damages (often millions)
• Banned from campus by the university

§ 37.154 Good-Faith Reporting Immunity:
Students who report hazing or call 911 in good faith are immune from civil or criminal liability that might otherwise result. This is critical—your child won’t get in trouble for seeking help.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Understanding the Difference

Criminal Cases (The State vs. Individuals):

• Brought by prosecutors (DA’s office)
• Goal: Punishment (jail, fines, probation)
• Common charges: Hazing, assault, furnishing alcohol to minors, manslaughter in fatal cases
• Reality: Many hazing cases never see criminal charges, or charges are reduced to misdemeanors

Civil Cases (Your Family vs. Responsible Parties):

• Brought by victims and families
• Goal: Compensation for damages and institutional accountability
• Targets: Individuals, local chapters, national headquarters, universities, property owners
• Advantage: Lower burden of proof than criminal cases, broader discovery rights

These cases can run simultaneously. A lack of criminal charges does not prevent a civil lawsuit. In fact, most financial recovery and institutional reform comes through civil litigation.

Federal Law Overlay: Title IX, Clery, and the Stop Campus Hazing Act

Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024):

• Requires colleges receiving federal aid to publicly report hazing incidents
• Mandates hazing prevention education programs
• Phased implementation through 2026
• Impact: More transparency about which organizations have violations

Title IX (Sexual Harassment/Sexual Assault):

• When hazing involves sexualized acts, nudity, or gender-based harassment
• Creates additional liability for universities that fail to respond appropriately
• Different procedures and standards than state hazing law

Clery Act (Campus Crime Reporting):

• Requires universities to report certain crimes, including assaults and alcohol violations
• Hazing incidents often overlap with Clery-reportable offenses
• Failure to report can lead to federal fines and loss of funding

Who Can Be Liable in a Texas Hazing Lawsuit?

1. Individual Students:

   • Those who planned, executed, or supervised the hazing
   • Those who supplied alcohol to minors
   • Those who delayed calling for medical help

2. Local Chapter/Housing Corporation:

   • The chapter as a legal entity (if incorporated)
   • The house corporation that owns/controls the property

3. National Fraternity/Sorority Headquarters:

   • For failing to supervise, enforce policies, or act on prior knowledge
   • Often have the deepest insurance pockets

4. University/Board of Regents:

   • For negligent supervision, deliberate indifference, or Title IX violations
   • Public universities (UH, Texas A&M, UT) have some sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist

5. Third Parties:

   • Property owners/landlords of off-campus houses
   • Bars/alcohol providers (under Texas dram shop law)
   • Security companies or event organizers

In the UH Pi Kappa Phi case we’re handling, we’ve sued all these categories: 13 individual members, the Beta Nu local chapter and housing corporation, Pi Kappa Phi national headquarters, the University of Houston, and the UH System Board of Regents. This comprehensive approach maximizes recovery and accountability.

National Hazing Case Patterns: What History Tells Us

The hazing that injured Leonel Bermudez at UH follows patterns we’ve seen repeated nationwide for decades. These cases matter to Grapeland families because they show how courts view hazing liability and what compensation juries award.

The Alcohol Poisoning Pattern (Multiple Deaths, Same Script)

Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021):

• What happened: 20-year-old pledge forced to drink entire bottle of alcohol during “Big/Little” night
• Outcome: Died from alcohol poisoning
• Legal result: Multiple criminal convictions; $10 million settlement ($7M from Pi Kappa Alpha national, ~$3M from BGSU)
• Texas relevance: Pi Kappa Alpha has chapters at UT Austin, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and other Texas schools

Max Gruver – LSU, Phi Delta Theta (2017):

• What happened: Pledge forced to participate in “Bible study” drinking game; wrong answers = forced drinking
• Outcome: Died from alcohol toxicity (BAC 0.495%)
• Legal result: $6.1 million verdict for family; Louisiana passed “Max Gruver Act” felony hazing law
• Texas relevance: Phi Delta Theta has chapters at UT Austin, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, SMU

Timothy Piazza – Penn State, Beta Theta Pi (2017):

• What happened: Bid acceptance night with extreme drinking; fell multiple times caught on chapter cameras; help delayed for hours
• Outcome: Died from traumatic brain injuries
• Legal result: 18 members charged with 1,000+ criminal counts; Pennsylvania passed “Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law”
• Texas relevance: Beta Theta Pi has chapters at UT Austin, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

The Physical Abuse Pattern (Non-Fatal But Catastrophic)

Danny Santulli – University of Missouri, Phi Gamma Delta (2021):

• What happened: 18-year-old pledge forced to drink excessive alcohol during “pledge dad reveal”
• Outcome: Severe, permanent brain damage—cannot walk, talk, or see; requires 24/7 care
• Legal result: Settlements with 22 defendants; confidential but reportedly multi-million dollar
• Texas relevance: Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI) has chapters at UT Austin, Texas A&M, Baylor, Texas Tech

Texas A&M Sigma Alpha Epsilon Chemical Burns (2021):

• What happened: Pledges allegedly covered in substances including industrial-strength cleaner, causing severe chemical burns requiring skin graft surgeries
• Outcome: Pledges sued for $1 million; chapter suspended
• Legal result: Confidential settlement
• Texas relevance: SAE has chapters at UT Austin, Texas A&M, SMU, Baylor, Texas Tech

The Deadly Ritual Pattern

Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013):

• What happened: Pledge blindfolded, weighted with backpack, repeatedly tackled during “glass ceiling” ritual at Pennsylvania retreat
• Outcome: Died from traumatic brain injury; help delayed
• Legal result: National fraternity criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter; banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years
• Texas relevance: Shows national organizations can face criminal liability

What These Cases Mean for Grapeland Families

1. Patterns Are Predictable: The same “traditions” (Big/Little nights, Bible study games, physical “workouts”) repeat across campuses and organizations. This makes injuries foreseeable—a key legal concept.

2. National Organizations Know the Risks: Every major national fraternity has anti-hazing policies because they’ve paid millions in settlements. When they fail to enforce those policies, liability increases.

3. Universities Often Fail to Prevent Known Dangers: Schools frequently have prior complaints about the same organizations but impose minimal penalties (probation, warning letters).

4. Juries Award Significant Damages: From $6.1 million for Max Gruver to $12.6 million in the Chad Meredith case, juries recognize the profound harm hazing causes.

For families in Grapeland, these national precedents matter because the same organizations operating at Texas schools have already established patterns of dangerous behavior nationwide.

Texas Universities: What Grap