When a college student heads off to a Texas university, families in Delta County and across the state envision a future filled with academic growth, new friendships, and exciting experiences. They do not envision their child being subjected to dangerous rituals, forced drinking games, or humiliating acts just to gain acceptance into a fraternity, sorority, club, or athletic team. Yet, for too many young Texans, the dream of college life turns into a nightmare because of hazing.
Imagine this scenario: It’s “initiation night” at an off-campus fraternity house near a major Texas university. A student from Delta County, eager to fit in and become part of a respected organization, finds themselves pressured to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol, far beyond safe limits. Older members are filming on their phones, chanting loudly, and laughing as the new members struggle. Suddenly, someone falls, vomits, or collapses. Panic sets in, but no one wants to call 911 because they are terrified of “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble.” The student from Delta County, witnessing this escalating danger, feels trapped between their desire for belonging and their deepening fear for their own safety and the safety of their peers.
This could happen at any Texas university—including those where Delta County families send their children. What appears to be harmless “tradition” on the surface can quickly become a felony offense with life-altering consequences.
This guide is designed to be a comprehensive resource on hazing and the law in Texas, specifically for families in Delta County and across Texas who need to understand:
- What hazing truly looks like in 2025, moving beyond outdated stereotypes.
- How Texas and federal law address hazing, providing a framework for accountability.
- The crucial lessons learned from major national cases and how their precedents apply to individuals and families here in Texas.
- The concerning patterns and documented incidents at leading Texas institutions like the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University.
- The legal options victims and their families in Delta County and throughout Texas may have to seek justice and prevent future harm.
While this article provides general information and not specific legal advice, The Manginello Law Firm is committed to evaluating individual cases based on their unique facts. We want Delta County families to know that we serve victims throughout Texas and are here to help shoulder the burden during such challenging times.
IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:
-
If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:
- Call 911 for medical emergencies.
- Then call Attorney911: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911).
- We provide immediate help – that’s why we’re the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.
-
In the first 48 hours:
- Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.” Prioritize their health and safety.
- Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
- Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages (DMs) immediately.
- Photograph any injuries from multiple angles and with a scale reference.
- Save physical items such as damaged clothing, receipts for forced purchases, or any objects used in the hazing.
- Write down everything while your memory is fresh: who was involved, what happened, when, and where.
- Do NOT:
- Confront the fraternity, sorority, or organization directly.
- Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal counsel.
- Post details on public social media platforms.
- Allow your child to delete messages or attempt to “clean up” any evidence.
-
Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:
- Critical evidence disappears quickly, including deleted group chats, destroyed property, and coached witnesses.
- Universities often move swiftly to control the narrative and internal investigations.
- We can help preserve crucial 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 Delta County and across Texas, understanding modern hazing means shedding old stereotypes. Hazing is no longer just about “pranks” or “boys will be boys” antics. It has evolved into a complex, often digital, system of control, psychological manipulation, and dangerous physical demands, all masked by the guise of “tradition” or “bonding.”
In plain English, hazing is any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, keeping membership, or gaining status in a group, where the behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits. This definition is crucial because it bypasses the common and legally irrelevant defense of “I agreed to it.” When there is peer pressure and a significant power imbalance, genuine consent is often impossible. The law, and our firm, recognizes this reality.
Main Categories of Hazing
Hazing manifests in various forms, often escalating in severity. These categories are not mutually exclusive; victims often experience a combination of them.
-
Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is arguably the most common and deadliest form of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking, often through elaborate “games,” chugging challenges, “lineups” where pledges consume drinks rapidly, or other scenarios designed to induce extreme intoxication. It also includes pressuring new members to consume unknown or mixed substances, which can have devastating health consequences. Many hazing fatalities across the country stem from alcohol poisoning during events like “Big/Little reveal” nights.
-
Physical Hazing: Beyond the traditional images of paddling or beatings, physical hazing today includes extreme calisthenics, forced “workouts,” or “smokings” far beyond typical athletic conditioning. Victims are often subjected to sleep deprivation, forced food or water deprivation, or exposure to harsh environmental conditions like extreme cold or heat. These acts can lead to serious injuries, organ damage, and even death, as seen in cases involving rhabdomyolysis due to overexertion.
-
Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This type of hazing is deeply violating and psychologically damaging. It involves forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (such as the infamous “elephant walk” or “roasted pig” positions), or other degrading acts. This can also include forcing pledges to participate in acts with racial, homophobic, or sexist overtones, including slurs or demeaning role-plays. The goal is to strip individuals of their dignity and assert control.
-
Psychological Hazing: This often leaves invisible scars but can be just as devastating. It involves verbal abuse, threats, forced social isolation, and constant manipulation intended to break down a new member’s self-esteem. Public shaming, whether in person during meetings or online through social media, is a powerful tool used to control and humiliate. This can lead to severe anxiety, depression, and long-term psychological trauma, sometimes requiring extensive therapy.
-
Digital/Online Hazing: With the ubiquity of smartphones and social media, hazing has moved into the digital realm. This includes dares, “challenges,” and public humiliation orchestrated via group chats on platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, or Discord, as well as on social media like Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok. Pledges are often pressured to create or share compromising images or videos, or to respond instantly to commands at all hours, further blurring the lines between online and offline abuse. The constant digital surveillance and demands create a 24/7 environment of psychological pressure.
Where Hazing Actually Happens
It is a common misconception that hazing is limited to “frat boys.” While fraternities and sororities, including Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations, are often at the center of hazing discussions, the reality is far broader. Hazing occurs across a wide spectrum of student organizations:
- Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: Organizations like the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets, with their emphasis on intense tradition and discipline, can be fertile ground for hazing.
- Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs: Groups like the Texas Cowboys (a removed organization at UT Austin) or other spirit and tradition-based clubs, often tie hazing into their perceived heritage.
- Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to baseball, cheerleading, and even club sports, hazing can be used as a perverse form of “team bonding.”
- Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups like marching bands can engage in dangerous hazing, as tragically seen in the Robert Champion case at Florida A&M.
- Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: Any group seeking exclusivity or adherence to “traditions” can potentially engage in hazing, demonstrating its pervasive nature across campus life.
Across these diverse groups, the underlying mechanisms are similar: social status, perceived tradition, and intense secrecy. These factors create an environment where dangerous practices persist, often hidden from university oversight and parents, despite everyone “knowing” that hazing is illegal and explicitly prohibited.
Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)
Understanding the legal landscape for hazing is crucial for Delta County families seeking justice. In Texas, hazing is not just a campus policy violation; it’s a crime with serious civil implications.
Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)
Texas has specific anti-hazing provisions outlined in the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This legislation broadly defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed on or off campus, by an individual alone or with others, directed against a student, which:
- 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.
This means that if someone makes your child do something dangerous, unhealthy, or degrading to join or stay in a group, and they acted with intent or recklessness regarding the risk, that’s hazing under Texas law.
Key points of Texas Hazing Law:
- Location is irrelevant: Whether the hazing happens on campus, in an off-campus house, or at a remote retreat, the law applies.
- Type of harm: It covers both physical injury and significant mental distress.
- Intent: You don’t have to prove malicious intent. “Reckless” conduct—meaning the person knew or should have known the risk but acted anyway—is sufficient.
- “Consent” is not a defense: As explicitly stated in Texas Education Code § 37.155, it is not a defense that the person being hazed “consented” to the activity. This recognizes the power dynamics and coercive nature of hazing.
Criminal Penalties:
- Class B Misdemeanor (default): For hazing that does not cause serious bodily injury. This can lead to up to 180 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $2,000.
- Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury requiring medical attention.
- State Jail Felony: If the hazing results in serious bodily injury or death. This is a significant escalation in severity.
Furthermore, individuals who are officers or members of an organization and know about hazing but fail to report it can also face misdemeanor charges. Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor under Texas law.
Organizational Liability:
Under Texas Education Code § 37.153, organizations (including fraternities, sororities, clubs, and athletic teams) can face criminal prosecution if they:
- Authorized or encouraged the hazing, OR
- An officer or member acting in an official capacity knew about the hazing and failed to report it.
Organizations found criminally liable can face fines of up to $10,000 per violation. Universally, this can also lead to the revocation of their recognition and a ban from campus. This provision underscores that accountability extends beyond individual students to the very structures that enable hazing.
Reporter Protections:
Texas Education Code § 37.154 offers a critical protection: a person who in good faith reports a hazing incident to university authorities or law enforcement is generally immune from civil or criminal liability that might otherwise result from the report. Additionally, in life-threatening medical emergencies, many university policies and Texas law provide amnesty for students who call 911 in good faith, even if they were consuming alcohol underage or were involved in the hazing itself. These protections are designed to encourage reporting and seeking help without fear of repercussions, prioritizing safety above all else.
Criminal vs. Civil Cases
When hazing occurs, two distinct legal paths can emerge:
-
Criminal Cases: These are initiated by the state (through a prosecutor) and aim to punish individuals or organizations for violating criminal laws. In hazing incidents, typical criminal charges can range from the hazing offenses themselves (ranging from misdemeanor to felony) to other crimes such as furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, or even manslaughter or negligent homicide in fatal cases. The burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” and the consequences can include fines, probation, or incarceration.
-
Civil Cases: These are brought by the victims of hazing or their surviving families. The primary goal of a civil case is to secure monetary compensation for the harm suffered and to hold responsible parties accountable. Civil claims often focus on:
- Negligence and Gross Negligence: Alleging that individuals or institutions failed to exercise reasonable care, leading to the hazing and injuries. Gross negligence implies a conscious indifference or reckless disregard for the safety of others.
- Wrongful Death: Filed by the families when hazing results in a fatality, seeking compensation for their losses.
- Negligent Hiring/Supervision: Alleging that institutions failed to adequately vet or oversee employees (e.g., fraternity advisors, coaches) who contributed to the hazing.
- Premises Liability: If the hazing occurred on property where the owner failed to maintain a safe environment or knowingly permitted dangerous activities.
- Emotional Distress: Seeking compensation for severe psychological harm caused by the hazing.
It’s important to understand that criminal and civil cases can proceed simultaneously, and a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a successful civil claim. The standard of proof in civil cases (“preponderance of the evidence,” meaning more likely than not) is lower than in criminal cases.
Federal Overlay: Stop Campus Hazing Act, Title IX, Clery
Beyond Texas state law, federal regulations also impose obligations on universities and provide additional avenues for accountability:
-
Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This significant federal legislation mandates that colleges and universities receiving federal funding must enhance their transparency and prevention efforts regarding hazing. By approximately 2026, these institutions will be required to publicly report hazing incidents in much greater detail, as well as strengthen their hazing education and prevention strategies. This act aims to create a more informed and safer campus environment nationwide.
-
Title IX: When hazing involves sex discrimination, sexual harassment, or gender-based hostility (e.g., forced sexual acts, gender-based humiliation), it can trigger a university’s obligations under Title IX. This federal law prohibits sex-based discrimination in education and requires institutions to investigate and address such conduct, regardless of where it occurs.
-
Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. Hazing incidents often overlap with categories reported under Clery, especially when they involve assaults, alcohol-related offenses, drug violations, or other criminal behaviors that endanger students. This act aims to provide transparency about campus safety.
Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit
Determining liability in a hazing case can be complex, but several entities and individuals may be held accountable:
-
Individual Students: Those who actively planned, enforced, supplied alcohol, carried out the hazing acts, or participated in any cover-up can face personal liability. This includes “pledge educators” or “new member coordinators” who orchestrated events.
-
Local Chapter / Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or athletic team, if it operates as a legal entity, can be sued. This is especially true if officers or leaders permitted or encouraged the hazing.
-
National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters, which sets policies, collects dues, and supervises local chapters, can be held liable. This often hinges on what the national organization knew (or should have known) about a chapter’s hazing history or a pattern of hazing within its organization nationwide. Cases of “pattern evidence” are critical here.
-
University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself (the college or university) may be sued under various legal theories, including negligence, gross negligence, or, in some cases, federal civil rights violations or Title IX claims. Key factors for university liability often include prior complaints, whether the university adequately enforced its own hazing policies, and its awareness of hazing activities.
-
Third Parties: Other entities can also be found liable, such as:
- Landlords or Property Owners: If hazing occurred on their property and they knew or should have known about the dangerous activities.
- Bars or Alcohol Providers: Under dram shop laws, if they illegally served alcohol to minors or visibly intoxicated individuals who then engaged in or became victims of hazing.
- Security Companies or Event Organizers: If their negligence contributed to an unsafe environment where hazing occurred.
Each hazing case is unique, and liability depends entirely on the specific facts and circumstances. Not every potential party will be found liable in every situation.
National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)
The tragic stories of hazing victims across the United States reveal disturbing patterns that are critically relevant to Texas families. These cases illustrate the severe consequences of hazing and the vast legal repercussions for individuals and institutions involved. They set precedents that can heavily influence how a hazing case in Delta County or anywhere in Texas might proceed.
Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern
Forced alcohol consumption continues to be the leading cause of hazing fatalities. These cases underscore the lethal dangers of “traditions” that prioritize group cohesion over safety.
-
Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries after a “bid acceptance” night involving extreme alcohol consumption. Security cameras within the Beta Theta Pi house captured Timothy’s multiple falls, and tragically, show fraternity brothers delaying medical help for hours despite his severe condition. This case led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the passing of the landmark Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania, which significantly strengthened anti-hazing statutes and emphasized the immediate need for medical assistance. The takeaway for Texas families is stark: extreme intoxication combined with a culture of silence and delay in calling 911 can be legally devastating, leading to both criminal and civil liability.
-
Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a pledge at FSU, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event where pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them rapidly. Following his death, criminal hazing charges were brought against multiple members, and Florida State University temporarily suspended all Greek life, initiating a comprehensive overhaul of its policies. This case tragically demonstrates how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster, raising questions for Texas families about similar events at schools like UH or Texas A&M.
-
Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver died from alcohol toxicity (with a blood alcohol content of 0.495%) during a “Bible study” drinking game where pledges were forced to drink whenever they answered questions incorrectly. His death spurred the passage of the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana, a felony hazing statute, and resulted in multiple members facing criminal charges, with one convicted of negligent homicide. The outcome of this case solidifies the understanding that legislative change often follows public outrage and undeniable proof of hazing, impacting the legal landscape for Texas hazing cases.
-
Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, was forced to consume nearly a full bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little night” and subsequently died from alcohol poisoning. This incident led to multiple criminal convictions against fraternity members for hazing-related offenses. In a significant move, Bowling Green State University agreed to a nearly $3 million settlement with the family, with additional substantial settlements reached with the fraternity and other individuals, including a judge’s order for personal liability against the chapter president. This case clearly shows that universities can face significant financial and reputational consequences, alongside fraternities, for failing to prevent hazing, offering a critical precedent for Texas universities like UT Austin or Baylor.
Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern
Beyond alcohol, physical and ritualized hazing can involve extreme physical endurance, violence, and dangerous, performative acts that lead to severe injuries or death.
- Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng was a pledge at a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains when he was subjected to a violent, blindfolded “glass ceiling” ritual where he was repeatedly tackled. He suffered fatal head injuries, and, alarmingly, his fraternity brothers delayed calling for medical help for hours. This tragic incident led to multiple members being convicted, and the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, subsequently being banned from Pennsylvania for a decade. This case highlights that off-campus “retreats” can be as dangerous or even more dangerous than on-campus events, and that national organizations are liable for the activities of their chapters, even when they occur off university property.
Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse
Hazing is not confined to Greek life; it also pervades athletic programs, proving that any group with a hierarchical structure and sense of tradition can be susceptible.
- Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In a widely publicized scandal, former football players at Northwestern alleged widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program spanning multiple years. The allegations included forced sexual acts, racial taunts, and other degrading behaviors. This resulted in multiple lawsuits against the university and its coaching staff, and head coach Pat Fitzgerald was fired, later filing a wrongful-termination suit which was confidentially settled. This case profoundly demonstrates that hazing is not limited to Greek letter organizations alone; powerful, big-money athletic programs can foster systemic abuse, raising critical questions for Texas universities with prominent athletic departments like Texas A&M or Baylor.
What These Cases Mean for Texas Families
These anchor stories reveal common, devastating patterns: forced drinking, extreme physical demands, humiliation, violence, and a pervasive culture of secrecy and delayed medical care. They illustrate that reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements or verdicts often follow only after tragedies occur and determined families pursue litigation.
For Delta County families who send their children to UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor, or any other Texas institution, these national lessons are vital. The legal framework and strategies employed in these cases provide a blueprint for holding responsible parties accountable here in Texas. You are not alone in facing these challenges, and we stand ready to help navigate this complex landscape.
Texas Focus: UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, Baylor
For Delta County families, understanding the specific hazing landscape at Texas’s major universities is paramount. Each institution has its own culture, policies, and history of incident response, directly affecting students who attend and the parents who support them. We, from our Houston offices, serve families across Texas, including Delta County and the surrounding regions, who entrust their children to these schools.
5.1 University of Houston (UH)
5.1.1 Campus & culture snapshot
The University of Houston, a vibrant and large urban campus, blends a mix of commuter and residential students. Its active Greek life, comprising numerous fraternities and sororities from various councils, along with a diverse array of student organizations including cultural groups and sports clubs, forms an integral part of its campus identity. Delta County families sending students to UH will find a dynamic and rapidly growing campus environment with significant opportunities for involvement.
5.1.2 Hazing policy & reporting
UH maintains a comprehensive hazing policy, strictly prohibiting hazing both on and off campus. Their policy explicitly bans forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and any acts causing mental distress as part of initiation or affiliation. Students and parents at UH can report hazing through the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, or directly to the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). While UH provides a hazing statement, the public availability of detailed disciplinary records for specific incidents may vary.
5.1.3 Example incident & response
A notable incident occurred in 2016 involving the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity chapter at UH. Pledges were allegedly deprived of sufficient food, water, and sleep during a multi-day event. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being slammed onto a table or similar surface during the hazing. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was subsequently suspended by the university. While not always detailed publicly, other fraternities have faced disciplinary action for behaviors “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” including alcohol misuse and policy violations leading to suspensions or probation. These events highlight UH’s resolve to suspend chapters when hazing is discovered, emphasizing the university’s commitment to maintaining a safe educational environment.
5.1.4 How a UH hazing case might proceed for Delta County families
For Delta County families impacted by hazing at UH, the legal process can involve several agencies. Law enforcement involvement may include the UHPD and/or the Houston Police Department, depending on where the incident occurred. Civil lawsuits seeking accountability and compensation for damages would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. Potential defendants often include the individual students involved, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and, potentially, the university itself and any property owners where the hazing took place.
5.1.5 What UH students & parents should do
- Report immediately: Utilize UH’s established channels, including the Dean of Students, UHPD, or online reporting forms.
- Document everything: Keep meticulous records of all communications, events, and injuries.
- Review past incidents: Investigate any publicly available information on previous hazing violations by organizations at UH.
- Consult legal experts: Contact a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases to help uncover prior discipline, internal university files, and navigate university processes effectively.
5.2 Texas A&M University
5.2.1 Campus & culture snapshot
Texas A&M University stands out for its deep-rooted traditions, particularly its prominent Corps of Cadets, which fosters a distinct military-style environment. The university’s strong emphasis on tradition and student organizations, including a large Greek life presence, creates a unique campus culture. Delta County families are often drawn to Texas A&M for its strong academic programs and rich traditions, but understanding the potential for hazing within such a tradition-heavy environment is crucial.
5.2.2 Hazing policy & reporting
Texas A&M maintains a stringent anti-hazing policy, clearly defining prohibited behaviors and outlining severe consequences for violations. Hazing is strictly forbidden both on and off university property. Reporting channels include the A&M Office of Student Conduct, the Office of the Commandant for Corps-related incidents, and the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD). The university proactively provides resources for discreet reporting, reinforcing their commitment to student safety.
5.2.3 Example incident & response
In 2021, the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity chapter at Texas A&M faced a lawsuit following allegations by pledges who claimed they were subjected to harmful substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, resulting in severe chemical burns that required emergency skin grafts. The fraternity was suspended by the university for two years, and the pledges pursued a civil lawsuit for over $1 million. Separately, in 2023, a Corps of Cadets lawsuit alleged degrading hazing, including simulated sexual acts and a cadet being bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. While Texas A&M stated it handled the matter under its internal regulations, these cases highlight the ongoing challenge of hazing within traditional and military-affiliated student groups, not just Greek life.
5.2.4 How a Texas A&M hazing case might proceed for Delta County families
For Delta County families with Aggie students, a hazing case might involve investigations by the Texas A&M UPD and potentially the College Station Police Department. Civil actions would typically be adjudicated in courts within Brazos County. Cases at Texas A&M often require a deep understanding of both Greek life and the specific regulations governing the Corps of Cadets. Potential defendants would include individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity, and the university, especially where negligence in oversight or policy enforcement can be demonstrated.
5.2.5 What Texas A&M students & parents should do
- Understand Corps regulations: If your child is in the Corps, familiarize yourself with its specific rules and anti-hazing policies (which can differ from general university policies).
- Document any distress: Keep detailed records of physical injuries or psychological symptoms.
- Utilize reporting channels: Contact the Office of Student Conduct or the Commandant’s Office if hazing is suspected.
- Seek legal counsel: A lawyer experienced in Texas hazing litigation can help navigate the complexities of both Greek life and Corps-related hazing allegations, ensuring evidence is preserved and rights are protected.
5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)
5.3.1 Campus & culture snapshot
The University of Texas at Austin, a sprawling campus in the heart of the state capital, boasts a massive student body and a vibrant, often intense, Greek life. Beyond fraternities and sororities, UT is home to numerous spirit groups and long-standing traditions that, while cherished, have sometimes been associated with hazing. Delta County families often choose UT for its academic prominence and diverse opportunities, making it crucial to understand safety protocols and student welfare measures.
5.3.2 Hazing policy & reporting
UT Austin’s anti-hazing policy is comprehensive, prohibiting any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. A key aspect of UT’s approach is its public Hazing Violations webpage (hazing.utexas.edu), which transparently lists organizations, dates of incidents, a description of the conduct, and the resulting sanctions. This level of transparency is a crucial tool for both prevention and accountability. Reporting can be made through the Dean of Students, the Office of Student Conduct, or the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD).
5.3.3 Example incident & response
UT’s public database reveals a pattern of recurring issues across various organizations. For instance, in 2023, the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity was sanctioned after new members were directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, which was found to constitute hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education. Other spirit groups and student organizations have also faced disciplinary actions for practices involving forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, degradation, or other forms of punishment-based activities. While UT’s transparency is commendable, the continued appearance of hazing incidents underscores the persistent challenge universities face in eradicating these behaviors.
5.3.4 How a UT Austin hazing case might proceed for Delta County families
For Delta County families, a hazing incident at UT Austin might involve investigations by both the UTPD and the Austin Police Department, depending on the specifics and location of the incident. Civil lawsuits would typically fall under the jurisdiction of courts in Travis County. The transparent nature of UT’s public hazing log can be a significant asset in civil cases, as prior violations clearly demonstrate patterns of problematic behavior and institutional knowledge of an organization’s history, strengthening arguments for negligence. Potential defendants would include individual perpetrators, the local chapter and its national organization, and potentially the university itself, given a strong factual basis for an individual’s gross negligence or other specific legal exceptions.
5.3.5 What UT students & parents should do
- Check the Hazing Violations website: Regularly consult hazing.utexas.edu to be aware of any organizations currently under sanction.
- Report all concerns: Utilize the Dean of Students office, UTPD, or the anonymous online reporting options provided by the university.
- Preserve digital evidence: Given the tech-savvy student body, immediate preservation of texts, photos, and social media posts is crucial.
- Consult experienced attorneys: A lawyer with a strong understanding of UT’s policies and hazing data can help navigate the evidence and build a compelling case.
5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)
5.4.1 Campus & culture snapshot
Southern Methodist University is a private institution located in Dallas, known for its academic rigor and its vibrant Greek life, which holds a significant social presence on campus. With a reputation for affluence, SMU attracts students who are often involved in various social and philanthropic activities. Delta County families choosing SMU should be aware of the dynamics within a private university setting, which can differ in terms of transparency and external oversight compared to public institutions.
5.4.2 Hazing policy & reporting
SMU maintains clear anti-hazing policies, prohibiting any act that causes or is likely to cause physical or psychological harm or humiliation for purposes of initiation or membership. As a private university, SMU’s internal disciplinary processes are often less publicly transparent than those of state-funded institutions. However, SMU emphasizes hazing prevention efforts, providing reporting forms and anonymous systems such as Real Response, to encourage students to come forward. Reports can be made to the Dean of Students, Student Affairs, or the SMU Police Department.
5.4.3 Example incident & response
In 2017, the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity chapter at SMU faced allegations of hazing that included members being reportedly paddled, forced to consume alcohol, and deprived of sleep. Following an investigation, the chapter was suspended and placed under significant restrictions, including limited recruiting, for several years. While specific details of private university investigations are generally less public, this incident underscores that even at well-resourced private institutions, hazing behaviors persist and result in serious disciplinary action.
5.4.4 How an SMU hazing case might proceed for Delta County families
For Delta County families, a hazing incident at SMU would likely involve investigations by the SMU Police Department and potentially the Dallas Police Department. Civil lawsuits would be filed in courts within Dallas County. While private universities typically have fewer immunity protections than public institutions, they often aggressively defend against hazing allegations. A key aspect of pursuing a case at SMU involves navigating the university’s internal records and compelling discovery through litigation, as their internal reports may not be publicly posted. Potential defendants would include individual perpetrators, the local chapter, the national fraternity, and SMU itself.
5.4.5 What SMU students & parents should do
- Understand private university processes: Be aware that SMU’s disciplinary procedures and data accessibility might differ from public universities.
- Utilize anonymous reporting tools: Encourage use of systems like Real Response if direct reporting feels unsafe.
- Document all communications: Keep meticulous records of interactions with SMU administrators, especially regarding hazing complaints.
- Engage legal counsel early: A lawyer experienced in private university hazing cases can help pierce the veil of internal privacy and extract necessary evidence for a legal claim.
5.5 Baylor University
5.5.1 Campus & culture snapshot
Baylor University, a private Baptist institution in Waco, is deeply characterized by its religious identity, strong academic programs, and passionate athletic culture. Despite its faith-based mission, Baylor has faced intense scrutiny in the past over high-profile scandals, particularly involving sexual assault and Title IX compliance. This history creates a complex backdrop for understanding how hazing incidents are perceived and handled, and it influences the expectations of Delta County families who send their children to the university.
5.5.2 Hazing policy & reporting
Baylor University maintains a “zero tolerance” policy for hazing. Their policy strictly prohibits any practice or activity that endangers the physical or mental health of a student for the purpose of initiation, admission into, or affiliation with an organization. Baylor’s reporting mechanisms include the Division of Student Life, the Title IX Office (if related to sexual misconduct), and the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD). The university is obligated to investigate all hazing reports and take appropriate disciplinary action.
5.5.3 Example incident & response
In 2020, the Baylor baseball team was at the center of a hazing investigation that resulted in the suspension of 14 players, with suspensions staggered over the early season. While the specific details of the hazing were not publicly released, the incident underscored that hazing can occur even within highly visible and often-celebrated athletic programs at religious institutions. Baylor’s response to this event, against the backdrop of its previous cultural and oversight challenges, indicates the ongoing struggle to align official “zero tolerance” policies with recurring misconduct within student groups.
5.5.4 How a Baylor hazing case might proceed for Delta County families
For Delta County families, a hazing incident at Baylor would typically involve investigations by the BUPD and potentially the Waco Police Department. Civil lawsuits would proceed in courts within McLennan County. Given Baylor’s private status and its history of legal challenges, particularly surrounding institutional oversight and reporting, cases against the university and its affiliated organizations can be complex. Such cases may focus significantly on whether Baylor adequately enforced its policies, responded to previous red flags, or maintained proper supervision, especially for high-profile athletic programs. Potential defendants could include individual student perpetrators, the local chapter or athletic program, and Baylor University itself.
5.5.5 What Baylor students & parents should do
- Be aware of Baylor’s history: Understand the university’s past challenges with institutional oversight and how that might impact internal investigations.
- Document everything from the start: This includes conversations, emails, and any evidence of hazing or its effects.
- Consider external reporting: While using Baylor’s internal channels, also understand that experienced legal counsel can help you determine if reporting to external law enforcement is appropriate.
- Seek legal advice early: A lawyer with experience in private university litigation can help navigate Baylor’s unique rules and past legal precedents to ensure your child’s rights are protected and that accountability is pursued.
Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories
For families in Delta County and throughout Texas, understanding the intersection of local chapter conduct and national organizational history is vital in hazing cases. Many fraternities and sororities active at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor are part of vast national networks. These national organizations often have a long—and often troubled—history with hazing incidents.
Why National Histories Matter
National headquarters, such as those governing Pi Kappa Alpha, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, or Kappa Alpha Order, develop thick anti-hazing manuals and risk management policies precisely because they have faced deaths and catastrophic injuries in the past. They are aware of the common patterns: forced drinking nights, physically abusive “traditions,” and humiliating rituals that repeatedly lead to tragic outcomes.
When a local chapter in Texas, whether at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor, repeats the same scripts that have previously led to a chapter being shut down or sued in another state, it creates a powerful argument for foreseeability. Such pattern evidence can strongly support claims of negligence or even gross negligence against national entities, potentially leading to significant financial settlements or punitive damages. It demonstrates that the national organization had prior knowledge of dangerous behaviors within its system and, arguably, failed to take sufficient action to prevent recurrence.
Organization Mapping: National Patterns & Texas Relevance
While not an exhaustive list of every chapter, the following provides a narrative overview of some major fraternities and sororities present at these Texas universities, particularly those with nationally recognized hazing issues.
-
Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor, Pi Kappa Alpha has a national history deeply marred by hazing incidents. The death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University (2021) due to forced alcohol consumption during a “Big/Little night” resulted in multiple criminal convictions and a $10 million settlement. Prior to this, the death of David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University (2012) also from alcohol poisoning led to a staggering $14 million settlement. These cases demonstrate a clear pattern of dangerous alcohol-related hazing that the national organization was undeniably aware of. When similar patterns emerge at Texas chapters, it strengthens claims against the national fraternity for failing to adequately police its local constituents.
-
Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU, Sigma Alpha Epsilon has been one of the fraternities most frequently associated with hazing fatalities and severe injuries nationwide, prompting its national organization to temporarily ban its traditional pledge process. Incidents like the University of Alabama traumatic brain injury case (filed 2023) and the Texas A&M University chemical burns case (2021), where pledges sustained severe chemical burns requiring skin grafts after being doused with industrial-strength cleaner, highlight patterns of extreme physical hazing. The University of Texas at Austin assault case (January 2024), where an exchange student alleged severe injuries at an SAE party, further illustrates ongoing issues. Such a consistent national and local history can be crucial evidence of foreseeability and systemic failure.
-
Phi Delta Theta: Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU, this fraternity became nationally infamous after the tragic death of Max Gruver at LSU (2017), who died from lethal alcohol toxicity during a forced drinking game. The case led to the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana, a felony hazing statute. This national incident creates a powerful precedent for any similar alcohol-related hazing claims involving Phi Delta Theta chapters in Texas, indicating a history of organizational awareness regarding the dangers.
-
Pi Kappa Phi (PKP): Active at UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin, Pi Kappa Phi is associated with the death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University (2017) due to acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Multiple members were prosecuted, and the incident led to a temporary suspension of all Greek life at FSU. This national pattern suggests that the Pi Kappa Phi national organization has significant prior notice of the risks associated with alcohol-centric initiation events.
-
Beta Theta Pi: With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU, Beta Theta Pi’s national reputation is inextricably linked with the death of Timothy Piazza at Penn State University (2017), a case that garnered international attention. Piazza’s death from traumatic brain injuries during extreme alcohol hazing led to criminal charges against numerous members and major anti-hazing legislative reforms. While the immediate incident was not in Texas, the lessons learned and the pressure on the national organization to reform its oversight are highly relevant to its chapters and Greek life at Texas universities.
-
Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI): While not as widely present at all five primary Texas universities mentioned, FIJI has had chapters at Texas A&M and UT Austin. The case of Danny Santulli at the University of Missouri (2021), who suffered severe, permanent brain damage from forced excessive alcohol consumption during a “pledge dad reveal” night, highlighted the catastrophic non-fatal injuries hazing can inflict. Settlements with 22 defendants, including the national fraternity, underscore the immense liability.
-
Kappa Alpha Order (KA): Present at Texas A&M and SMU, KA chapters have faced various hazing allegations and suspensions across the country, including those at SMU in 2017 involving paddling and sleep deprivation. This consistent pattern of local violations reflecting national themes is something experienced attorneys investigate thoroughly.
-
Kappa Sigma (KS): Present at UH, Texas A&M, and Baylor, this fraternity was implicated in the Chad Meredith drowning death at the University of Miami (2001), resulting in a $12.6 million jury verdict. More recently, allegations of severe injuries from physical hazing (including rhabdomyolysis) at Texas A&M (2023) highlight ongoing risks at Texas chapters.
-
Lambda Phi Epsilon (LPE): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin, LPE has a national history of hazing-related fatalities involving physical endurance tests, such as the death of Kenny Luong at UC Irvine (2005) after being tackled during a football game as part of a hazing ritual.
Tie Back to Legal Strategy
These detailed national and campus-specific histories are not merely cautionary tales; they form critical components of a robust legal strategy. When a lawsuit is filed for hazing in Texas, experienced attorneys investigate:
- Pattern Evidence: Repeated incidents across different states or campuses by the same national organization demonstrate a pattern of behavior and establish that the national entity had prior warnings about specific dangerous practices. This is crucial for proving foreseeability.
- Failure to Enforce Policies: If a national organization has stringent anti-hazing policies but consistently fails to enforce them or imposes only minimal punishment for violations, it can expose them to claims of negligent supervision or gross negligence.
- Institutional Knowledge: Courts can consider whether national organizations, through their advisors, representatives, or internal reporting channels, knew or should have known about the hazing occurring within their chapters.
- Settlement Leverage and Punitive Damages: A strong record of prior incidents can significantly increase settlement leverage and, in appropriate cases, lay the groundwork for seeking punitive damages, which are designed to punish reckless conduct and deter future harm.
For Delta County families, this means the fight for justice is not isolated to a single chapter or university. It often extends to powerful national organizations, holding them accountable for systemic failures that permit hazing to persist.
Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy
Successfully pursuing a hazing lawsuit requires methodical evidence collection, a deep understanding of applicable damages, and a precise legal strategy. For Delta County families, knowing what evidence matters and how an experienced legal team builds a case can provide clarity and empower them during a difficult time.
7.1 Evidence
In today’s digital age, evidence in hazing cases is rapidly evolving. The quality and preservation of this evidence are paramount.
-
Digital Communications: These are often the most critical pieces of evidence. This includes group chats and direct messages (DMs) from platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, and fraternity/sorority-specific apps. They reveal planning, coercion, threats, and cover-up attempts. Evidence includes both live messages and successfully recovered deleted messages. Attorney911’s video on using your phone to document evidence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) explains best practices for preserving screenshots and photos.
-
Photos & Videos: Personal phones and security systems often capture crucial moments. This includes content filmed by members during hazing events, footage shared in group chats or on social media (even if since deleted), and security camera or doorbell footage from houses and venues where events occurred. Critical photos also include those of injuries, documenting their progression over time.
-
Internal Organization Documents: These can reveal the official and unofficial rules. This includes pledge manuals, initiation scripts (even if disguised as “tradition”), lists of ritual “traditions” obtained through discovery, internal emails or texts from officers discussing “what we’ll do to pledges,” and national organization policies and training materials. These documents help establish intent, knowledge, and patterns of behavior.
-
University Records: Through formal requests or subpoenas in litigation, these records can be obtained. They include prior conduct files related to the specific organization (showing probation, suspensions, or warning letters), incident reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices, Title IX complaints if applicable, and Clery reports (annual safety statistics) which might show patterns of alcohol-related offenses or assaults. Internal emails among administrators discussing the organization’s conduct can also be vital.
-
Medical and Psychological Records: Crucial for documenting damages, these include emergency room and hospitalization records, surgical reports, physical therapy notes, medication lists, and toxicology reports (especially for alcohol or drug-related hazing). Perhaps most importantly, psychological evaluations diagnosing PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidal ideation provide objective evidence of mental health harm, often a significant component of non-economic damages.
-
Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are powerful. This includes testimony from other pledges, current members (who may choose to come forward with legal protection), roommates, Residence Assistants (RAs), coaches, trainers, or other bystanders. Former members who quit or were expelled can also offer invaluable insights into historical hazing practices.
7.2 Damages
When hazing results in injury or death, the law aims to compensate victims and their families for a wide range of losses, known as “damages.” These are not simply arbitrary figures but represent real, quantifiable harm.
-
Medical Bills & Future Care: This category includes immediate costs such as emergency room visits, ambulance transport, and intensive care unit (ICU) stays. It also covers ongoing expenses like surgeries, physical therapy, rehabilitation, prescription medications, and durable medical equipment. For catastrophic injuries like traumatic brain injuries, this can extend to life care plans needed for decades of specialized care.
-
Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: This covers past lost wages for the victim or, in some cases, for parents who had to take time off work to provide care. It also includes the future impact on earning potential due to missed semesters, delayed graduation, or impaired ability to enter or advance in a chosen profession if injuries are permanent. Tuition and fees for educational opportunities lost due to withdrawal or medical leave, as well as revoked scholarships, also fall under this category.
-
Non-Economic Damages: These are more subjective but fiercely real. They include compensation for:
- Physical Pain and Suffering: The direct pain from injuries, and any chronic or ongoing pain.
- Emotional Distress, Trauma, and Humiliation: This can encompass intense fear, anxiety, depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and the profound emotional anguish caused by the hazing.
- Loss of Enjoyment of Life: Compensation for the inability to participate in activities, hobbies, or social interactions that were once central to the victim’s life.
- Disfigurement or Impairment: If the hazing caused permanent scarring, loss of bodily function, or other lasting physical changes.
-
Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): When hazing leads to a fatality, surviving family members can seek damages for their profound loss. This includes:
- Funeral and Burial Costs.
- Loss of Financial Support: Calculated based on the deceased’s projected lifetime earnings and contributions to the family.
- Loss of Companionship, Love, and Society: Compensation for the profound emotional void left by the loss of a loved one.
- Grief and Emotional Suffering: For the severe emotional pain experienced by parents, children, or spouses.
It’s vital to remember that describing “types of damages” is not a prediction of specific dollar amounts. Every case is unique, and actual recovery depends on its specific facts.
7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage
Holding multiple parties accountable is key to maximizing recovery and ensuring justice. In hazing cases, national fraternities and universities often carry significant liability insurance policies that may respond to claims. However, it’s not always straightforward.
- Insurance Company Tactics: Insurers frequently attempt to deny coverage for hazing, arguing that such acts are “intentional conduct” or “criminal acts” and thus excluded from their policies. They may also claim specific defendants are not covered or that certain exclusions apply.
- Experienced Legal Navigation: Attorney911’s team, including Lupe Peña, a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), understands these tactics from the inside. We are adept at identifying all potential sources of insurance coverage, challenging wrongful denials, and strategically navigating disputes about exclusions, trigger dates, and the nuances of “negligent supervision” versus “intentional acts” to ensure our clients’ rights are protected.
- Multiple Defendants: By identifying and pursuing all potentially liable parties—from individual students and local chapters to national organizations, universities, and even third-party property owners or alcohol providers—we increase the chances of securing comprehensive compensation. This strategic approach ensures that no stone is left unturned in our pursuit of justice for Delta County families.
Practical Guides & FAQs
When hazing impacts a family in Delta County, the immediate aftermath can be overwhelming. Knowing what to do, what to look for, and who to trust is critical. This section provides invaluable, actionable advice for parents, students, and even former members or witnesses.
8.1 For Parents
Delta County parents are often the first line of defense when it comes to identifying and addressing hazing.
-
Warning Signs of Hazing:
- Unexplained Injuries: Be alert to bruises, cuts, burns, or repeated “accidents” with inconsistent or vague explanations.
- Extreme Exhaustion: Sudden, severe fatigue, or extreme sleep deprivation, impacting their academic performance and general well-being.
- Drastic Mood Changes: Uncharacteristic anxiety, depression, irritability, or withdrawal from usual social circles and family.
- Secrecy: A sudden refusal to discuss organizational activities, often with phrases like “I can’t talk about it” or “It’s a secret.”
- Digital Demands: Constant phone use for group chats, an anxious reaction to phone notifications, or a fear of missing “mandatory” events outside of normal hours.
-
How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not judgment. Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with the [organization]?” or “Is there anything that makes you uncomfortable?” Emphasize that their safety and well-being are your top priorities, and that you will support them regardless of their choices about the group. Reinforce that your primary concern is their health and safety, not their position in the organization.
-
If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize their health and safety above all else. Seek immediate medical attention, documenting all injuries with multiple photos and detailed notes. If your child shares texts, photos, or DMs, screenshot them immediately, capturing timestamps and contact information. These contemporaneous records are crucial for any potential legal action.
-
Dealing with the University: Document every communication with university administrators. Ask specific questions about prior incidents involving the same organization and what actions the school took. Observe how thoroughly they investigate and if they appear to prioritize the institution’s reputation over your child’s well-being.
-
When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing or hiding what happened, it’s time to call an attorney. The Manginello Law Firm offers confidential consultations to help Delta County families understand their rights and options.
8.2 For Students / Pledges
Every student, especially those from Delta County attending Texas universities, deserves to pursue their education in a safe environment. You have rights, and you are not alone.
-
Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Ask yourself: Am I being forced, coerced, or unduly pressured to do something I don’t truly want to do? Would I do this if there were no social consequences or fear of being removed from the group? Does this activity endanger my mental or physical health? If the activity is hidden from the public or administrators, it is very likely hazing. Your gut feeling is often right. For detailed understanding, refer to Appendix A (Hazing Tactics Encyclopedia) to see if your experience matches the tier system.
-
Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: It’s common to feel that you “agreed” to the process, but the law recognizes that true consent is absent when there’s intense peer pressure, a significant power imbalance, and fear of exclusion. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. You are a victim, not a willing participant in illegal conduct.
-
Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the legal right to leave any organization at any time. If you feel unsafe, remove yourself from the situation immediately and get to a secure location, like your dorm or a trusted friend’s place. You can report hazing anonymously through campus hotlines or the National Anti-Hazing Hotline: 1-888-NOT-HAZE. Email the chapter president or new member educator stating your resignation, and avoid going to “one last meeting” where you might be pressured or intimidated.
-
Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Many schools and Texas law offer legal protections for students who call for help in an emergency, even if they were underage drinking or involved in the hazing. Your safety, and the safety of others, takes precedence.
8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses
If you were a part of hazing, even as a participant or observer, and now carry guilt or regret, your actions can save lives and help ensure accountability. Delta County residents who served as witnesses or former members, your perspective is often invaluable.
Acknowledge the weight of your experience, including any fear of repercussions or feelings of guilt. However, understand that your testimony and any evidence you possess could be crucial in preventing future harm and holding negligent parties accountable. While you may want to seek your own legal advice, cooperating with an investigation can be an important step toward finding peace and making a difference. Experienced lawyers can help navigate your role as a witness, and in some cases, ensure legal protections are in place.
8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case
For Delta County families facing the aftermath of hazing, understanding common pitfalls is crucial to protecting your legal rights and securing justice. One wrong step can severely damage or even destroy a viable case. These are critical mistakes to avoid:
-
Letting your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence:
- What parents think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble” or “I want to protect their privacy.”
- Why it’s wrong: This can be perceived as an active cover-up, potentially hindering an investigation, and making a civil case nearly impossible. Deleted digital evidence (group chats, texts, photos) is often the strongest proof of hazing.
- What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing or seemingly minor content. Take screenshots with full context, including sender, recipient, and timestamps.
-
Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly:
- What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
- Why it’s wrong: Direct confrontation will immediately alert the organization, prompting them to lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defenses. This can compromise your ability to gather unbiased information.
- What to do instead: Document everything privately, then call an experienced attorney before any direct communication with the organization. Let your legal counsel manage all official contact.
-
Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms:
- What universities do: They often pressure families to sign waivers, non-disclosure agreements, or “internal resolution” forms, sometimes offering minimal compensation or disciplinary action.
- Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue further legal action or receive adequate compensation. Settlements offered at this stage are almost always far below the actual value of your case.
- What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or any organization without an attorney thoroughly reviewing it first.
-
Posting details on social media before talking to a lawyer:
- What families think: “I want people to know what happened; I want justice.”
- Why it’s wrong: Anything posted online can be used by defense attorneys, who screenshot everything. Inconsistencies or emotional statements can hurt your credibility, and you might accidentally waive legal privileges.
- What to do instead: Document your experiences privately. Let your lawyer control the public messaging and determine the most strategic time to release information if your family chooses to do so.
-
Letting your child go back to “one last meeting” or agree to “talk it over” with the organization:
- What fraternities say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic; let’s work this out.”
- Why it’s wrong: These meetings are often designed to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can be used against your child or your case. The organization’s goal is to control the narrative and prevent legal action.
- What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication with the organization must be handled by your attorney.
-
Waiting “to see how the university handles it” internally:
- What universities promise: “We’re investigating; let us handle this internally; we have a zero-tolerance policy.”
- Why it’s wrong: Evidence rapidly disappears, witnesses graduate and scatter, organizations destroy records, and the statute of limitations continues to run. University internal processes often prioritize institutional reputation over true accountability or victim compensation.
- What to do instead: Preserve all evidence immediately. Consult with a lawyer right away. While university processes may run in parallel, true accountability and compensation often require external legal action.
-
Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer:
- What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim; we want to help.”
- Why it’s wrong: Insurance adjusters represent the interests of the insurance company, not yours. Recorded statements can be cherry-picked and used against you, and initial settlement offers are almost always lowball.
- What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with any insurance adjuster directly. State, “My attorney will contact you,” and then immediately inform your legal counsel.
8.5 Short FAQ
-
“Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities in Texas, such as UH, Texas A&M, and UT, have some sovereign immunity protections, but specific exceptions exist for gross negligence, Title IX violations, and when suing individual employees in their personal capacity. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on its specific facts; contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis. -
“Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
It certainly 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. This means a hazing incident can lead to felony charges and imprisonment. Additionally, individual officers of an organization can face misdemeanor charges for failing to report hazing they knew about. -
“Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
Absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing charges or a civil lawsuit. The law recognizes that “agreement” under intense peer pressure, significant power imbalances, and fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent. Our legal system aims to protect individuals, especially young students, from harmful and coercive practices. -
“How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
In Texas, the general statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death cases is two years from the date of injury or death. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this period if the harm or its cause was not immediately apparent. In cases involving cover-ups or fraudulent concealment, the statute may be “tolled” (paused). Time is critical in hazing cases because evidence can disappear quickly, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations may destroy records. We urge Delta County families to call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to ensure legal deadlines are not missed. -
“What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
The location of the hazing does not necessarily eliminate liability for the university or the national organization. Universities and national fraternities or sororities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control over the chapter, knowledge of previous hazing incidents, and the foreseeability of such events occurring, regardless of where they took place. Many major national hazing cases, such as the Pi Delta Psi retreat death and the Sigma Pi case involving an unofficial off-campus house, demonstrate that multi-million-dollar judgments have been awarded for incidents occurring off university property. -
“Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
We understand that privacy is a significant concern for Delta County families. The vast majority of hazing cases settle confidentially before ever reaching a public trial. With an experienced attorney, we can often request sealed court records and negotiate confidential settlement terms. Our priority is to protect your family’s privacy while aggressively pursuing accountability and justice. We will always discuss all options with you and respect your choices regarding publicity.
About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action
When your family in Delta County faces the devastation of a hazing incident, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to secure justice even against overwhelming odds. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, brings unparalleled expertise to hazing cases across Texas.
From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Delta County and surrounding areas, because we understand that hazing at Texas universities affects communities far and wide. For Delta County families, we are your seasoned advocates, equipped to handle the complexities of campus abuse.
Attorney911’s Unique Qualifications for Hazing Cases:
-
Insurance Insider Advantage (Lupe Peña): Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, leverages her invaluable experience 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 intricate network of coverage exclusion arguments, and their settlement strategies because she used to run their playbook. This insider perspective is a distinct advantage for our clients.
-
Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions (Ralph Manginello): Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, has decades of experience taking on formidable opponents. He was one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, a monumental case against a global corporation. His federal court experience, particularly in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, means we are not intimidated by national fraternities, multi-billion-dollar universities, or their well-resourced defense teams. We’ve gone head-to-head with corporations that have virtually unlimited resources and won; we know how to fight powerful defendants.
-
Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have a proven track record in obtaining multi-million dollar settlements and verdicts in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. We collaborate with leading economists and medical experts to accurately value not only immediate losses but also lifetime care needs for victims of traumatic brain injuries or permanent disabilities. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force accountability and provide for our clients’ long-term needs.
-
Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA), an elite legal organization, provides us with unique insight into the criminal aspects of hazing. This expertise allows us to skillfully advise families when criminal hazing charges may run parallel to a civil lawsuit, understanding how these intertwined legal processes impact victims and potential defendants.
-
Investigative Depth: We pride ourselves on a relentless investigative approach. We work with a network of experts—including digital forensics specialists, medical professionals, economists, and psychologists—to uncover hidden evidence. This includes obtaining deleted group chats, subpoenaing national fraternity records to expose prior incidents, and extracting crucial university files through discovery and public records requests. We investigate as if your child’s life depends on it—because it truly does.
We understand how fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments often operate behind closed doors. We know how to investigate modern hazing, from digital footprints to witness testimony, and how to prove coercion. We recognize that hazing cases present unique challenges, dealing with powerful institutional defendants, complex insurance coverage fights, and the delicate balance of victim privacy versus public accountability. We also respect the cultural nuances of Greek life and university traditions, allowing us to build nuanced and effective legal strategies.
Above all, we operate with empathy and a steadfast commitment to victim advocacy. We know this is one of the hardest things a family in Delta County can ever face. Our job is to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We focus on thorough investigation and real accountability, not just quick settlements.
Call to Action
If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus—whether at Texas A&M, the University of Texas at Austin, Baylor, SMU, UH, or any other institution—we want to hear from you. Families in Delta County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers and accountability.
We invite you to contact The Manginello Law Firm for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We’ll listen to what happened without judgment, explain your legal options, and help you decide on the best path forward for your family.
What to Expect in Your Free Consultation:
- We will listen attentively to your story and the details of your experience.
- We will review any evidence you may have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
- We will explain your legal options clearly: exploring whether a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither is appropriate for your situation.
- We will discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
- We will answer your questions about legal costs, explaining our contingency fee basis – meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case.
- There is no pressure to hire us on the spot; we encourage you to take the time you need to decide.
- Everything you tell us during this consultation is strictly confidential.
Contact 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 – Please contact Lupe Peña directly at lupe@atty911.com for consultation in Spanish. Servicios legales en español disponibles.
Reading this article does not create an attorney–client relationship. Every case is unique, and we cannot guarantee specific outcomes. However, an experienced attorney can review your specific facts, explain your rights under Texas law, and help you understand your options. Whether you’re in Delta County or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this alone. Call us today.
Legal Disclaimer
This article is provided for informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC.
Hazing laws, university policies, and legal precedents can change. The information in this guide is current as of late 2025 but may not reflect the most recent developments. Every hazing case is unique, and outcomes depend on the specific facts, evidence, applicable law, and many other factors.
If you or your child has been affected by hazing, we strongly encourage you to consult with a qualified Texas attorney who can review your specific situation, explain your legal rights, and advise you on the best course of action for your family.
The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911
Houston, Austin, and Beaumont, Texas
Call: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
Direct: (713) 528-9070 | Cell: (713) 443-4781
Website: https://attorney911.com
Email: ralph@atty911.com