In Goliad County, our Fraternity & Sorority Hazing Lawyers at Attorney911 — Legal Emergency Lawyers™ offer unparalleled expertise. We handle University Hazing Injury & Wrongful Death cases, leveraging a Former Insurance Defense Attorney’s knowledge of fraternity insurance tactics. With Federal Court Experience taking on National Fraternities & Universities, including past BP Explosion Litigation, we prove our ability to fight massive institutions. Our HCCLA Criminal Defense + Civil Wrongful Death Expertise and Multi-Million Dollar Proven Results extend to UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor hazing cases. We are Evidence Preservation Specialists with 25+ Years Experience. Hablamos Español. Free Consultation. Contingency Fee: No Win, No Fee. Call 1-888-ATTY-911.

When a child leaves Goliad County to embark on their college journey, parents envision growth, learning, and exciting new experiences. They picture academic achievements, new friendships, and healthy development. What no parent ever anticipates is a phone call delivering news of illness, injury, or even death, all due to the dangerous and illegal practice of hazing. This scenario, tragically common across Texas campuses, can shatter families and leave lasting physical and emotional scars.

We understand that for families in Goliad County and across Texas, the landscape of collegiate life can feel both promising and perilous. The tradition of Greek life, sports teams, and campus organizations often comes with an unspoken risk – the risk of hazing. This comprehensive guide aims to illuminate the hidden dangers of hazing, clarify the legal protections available in Texas, and empower families of students from Goliad County and beyond with knowledge and resources.

This article serves as your definitive guide to understanding modern hazing practices, the legal framework in Texas, and how major national incidents connect to what’s happening at our state’s universities. We will explore the hazing histories of prominent Greek organizations and athletic programs and provide practical advice for parents, students, and witnesses entangled in these difficult situations.

As experienced hazing litigation attorneys, we serve families throughout Texas, including those in Goliad County, who are seeking answers and accountability. While this article offers general information, it is not a substitute for specific legal advice. We invite you to contact our firm for a confidential evaluation of your unique circumstances.

Immediate Help for Hazing Emergencies

If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

• Call 911 for medical emergencies.
• Then call Attorney911: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911). We provide immediate help – that’s why we’re the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

In the first 48 hours:

• Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.”
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages (DMs) immediately.
  • Photograph injuries from multiple angles.
  • Save physical items, such as clothing, receipts, or objects used in hazing.
• Write down everything while memory is fresh: who was involved, what happened, when it occurred, 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.
  • Allow your child to delete messages or “clean up” any evidence.

Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

• Evidence disappears fast – deleted group chats, destroyed paddles, coached witnesses.
• Universities often move quickly to control the narrative.
• We can help preserve crucial evidence and protect your child’s rights.
• Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

The image of hazing as simple pranks or harmless initiations is outdated and dangerous. In 2025, hazing has evolved into a complex, often brutal system of physical, psychological, and digital abuse, affecting students from Goliad County and across the nation. It’s no longer confined to male fraternities; it permeates sororities, athletic teams, marching bands, and even academic organizations. Beneath the guise of “tradition” or “bonding,” lies a predatory culture that frequently exploits the vulnerable desire for acceptance.

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. The critical element here is the power imbalance: even if a student superficially “agrees” to participate, true consent is often absent when faced with intense peer pressure, fear of exclusion, or the threat of losing a coveted spot in an organization. The claim “I agreed to it” does not automatically make it safe or legal when power dynamics are at play.

Main Categories of Modern Hazing

To fully grasp the scope of the problem impacting students, including those in Goliad County, we must examine the multifaceted forms hazing takes:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains one of the most prevalent and deadly forms of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking of excessive amounts of alcohol, often through “chugging challenges,” “lineups” where pledges consume multiple shots rapidly, or “games” that require dangerous levels of intoxication. Students may also be pressured to consume unknown substances, illicit drugs, or even non-alcoholic liquids in harmful quantities, leading to alcohol poisoning, organ damage, or long-term health issues.
• Physical Hazing: Beyond the stereotyped paddling, modern physical hazing can be insidious. It includes forced beatings, repeated abusive “workouts” (often called “smokings” or “conditioning”) that extend far beyond safe limits, leading to conditions like rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown). Sleep deprivation, food and water deprivation, and continuous physical discomfort are common. Victims may also be exposed to extreme temperatures or dangerous environments, intentionally putting their health at risk.
• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This particularly egregious form of hazing involves forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (such as “roasted pig” positions or “elephant walks”), or being forced to wear degrading costumes. These acts are often coupled with racial, homophobic, or sexist slurs and role-play, creating an environment of profound humiliation and psychological scarring, potentially leading to long-term trauma and mental health crises.
• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but deeply damaging, psychological hazing involves verbal abuse, constant threats, social isolation, and manipulative tactics. This can include incessant yelling, constant belittling, forced confessions, and public shaming campaigns on social media or in group meetings. The goal is to break down a new member’s sense of self-worth and identity, replacing it with loyalty to the group above all else.
• Digital/Online Hazing: With the rise of technology, hazing has moved into the digital realm. This includes constant monitoring through group chats (GroupMe, WhatsApp, Discord), requiring immediate responses at all hours, and using online platforms for dares, challenges, and public humiliation via Instagram, Snapchat, or TikTok. Pledges might be pressured to create or share compromising images or videos of themselves or others, leading to significant reputational and emotional harm.

Where Hazing Actually Happens in Texas

Hazing is not exclusive to “frat boys” at large universities. The problem is widespread and can manifest in various campus communities:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations active at universities around Goliad County and across Texas.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: At institutions like Texas A&M, the Corps has historically faced scrutiny over severe hazing practices disguised as “tradition” or “discipline.”
• Spirit Squads and Tradition Clubs: Organizations like the Texas Cowboys at UT Austin or specific spirit groups at other universities have been sanctioned for hazing violations.
• Athletic Teams: Football, basketball, baseball, cheer, swim, and other university athletic programs often face hazing allegations, which can involve extreme physical endurance, alcohol abuse, or sexualized rituals.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly harmless organizations can harbor hazing cultures, leading to physical abuse, sleep deprivation, or psychological torment.
• Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: While less common, some non-Greek or non-athletic groups have been found to engage in hazing as part of their “initiation” into their ranks.

The prevalence of hazing across such diverse organizations highlights a troubling reality for Goliad County families: the desire for social status, group cohesion, and perceived “tradition” often overrides official policies and common sense. A culture of secrecy, fueled by demands for loyalty and fear of consequences, allows these dangerous practices to continue, often with devastating results.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

For families in Goliad County grappling with hazing, understanding the legal landscape is crucial. Texas provides specific protections, but the effectiveness of these laws often depends on the victim’s willingness to come forward and the quality of legal representation. Beyond state laws, federal policies also play a role in compelling universities to address hazing.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Under Texas law, hazing is not just a university disciplinary issue—it’s a crime. The Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F, broadly defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, committed by one person or with others, directed against a student, that:

• Endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student, such as beating, forced exercise, or forced consumption of alcohol or drugs.
• For the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

This definition is critical because it highlights several key aspects:

• Broad Scope: Hazing can happen both on or off campus and involves actions that threaten either mental or physical health. This means emotional abuse and psychological torment can be legally classified as hazing, not just physical violence.
• Intent Requirement: The act must be “intentional, knowing, or reckless.” This means the perpetrator either meant to cause harm, knew harm was likely, or acted with a conscious disregard for a substantial and unjustifiable risk that harm would occur.
• No “Consent” Defense: The Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the activity. This recognizes that when there’s a power imbalance, peer pressure, or fear of exclusion, true voluntary consent is often impossible.
• Criminal Penalties:
  • Most hazing offenses are classified as a Class B Misdemeanor, carrying potential fines and jail time.
  • If the hazing causes injury requiring medical treatment, it can be a Class A Misdemeanor.
  • Crucially, if hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it becomes a State Jail Felony, a much more severe charge with potential prison time.
  • Individuals who are aware of hazing and fail to report it can also face misdemeanor charges, as can those who retaliate against someone who reports hazing.
• Organizational Liability: Texas Penal Code § 37.153 outlines that organizations themselves (fraternities, sororities, sports teams, clubs) can be held criminally liable if they authorized, encouraged, or knew about hazing and failed to report it. Penalties for organizations can include fines and loss of university recognition.
• Reporter Protections: Texas law also offers immunity for individuals who report hazing in good faith, encouraging victims and witnesses to come forward without fear of legal repercussions for their report. Furthermore, Texas’s “Good Samaritan” laws often protect individuals who call for medical help in an emergency, even if underage drinking was involved.

This summary provides a foundational understanding of Texas hazing law. However, interpreting and applying these statutes to a specific case requires specialized legal expertise.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Understanding Your Options

When hazing occurs, there are often two distinct legal paths that can be pursued:

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated by the state (prosecutors) against individuals or organizations accused of violating criminal hazing statutes or related laws (e.g., assault, furnishing alcohol to minors, manslaughter). The primary goal of a criminal case is to punish offenders through fines, incarceration, or probation. While a criminal conviction can bring a sense of justice, it typically does not directly compensate the victim for their injuries or losses.
• Civil Cases: These are brought by the victims or their surviving family members. The aim of a civil lawsuit is to obtain monetary compensation for damages suffered due to the hazing. This can cover medical expenses, lost education, pain, suffering, and in the tragic event of a death, funeral costs and loss of companionship. Civil cases often focus on proving negligence (failure to act reasonably to prevent harm), gross negligence (extreme disregard for safety), wrongful death, premises liability, or other torts against individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and even universities.

It is crucial to understand that these two types of cases can proceed independently. A criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil lawsuit, and vice-versa. In fact, civil lawsuits often uncover evidence that later informs criminal investigations. Our firm’s dual expertise in both civil personal injury and criminal defense positions us uniquely to advise clients through the complexities where these two legal paths intersect.

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

Beyond state law, federal regulations also impose obligations on universities and provide additional avenues for accountability.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation, set to be fully implemented by 2026, aims to increase transparency and prevention efforts. It will require colleges and universities receiving federal funds to:
  • Report hazing incidents and related disciplinary actions more comprehensively.
  • Publish these hazing reports publicly, similar to existing Clery Act crime statistics.
  • Implement stronger hazing education and prevention strategies.
    This act means that universities, including those important to Goliad County families such as UT Austin and Texas A&M, will soon be required to provide a clearer public picture of hazing on their campuses.
• Title IX: This federal law prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based humiliation, or creates a hostile environment based on sex, Title IX obligations are triggered. This can compel universities to investigate, take corrective action, and potentially be liable for failing to address such misconduct.
• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. While hazing is not explicitly a Clery crime, many hazing incidents involve underlying Clery-reportable offenses such as assault, liquor law violations, drug violations, or sexual offenses. These federal mandates underline a university’s responsibility to maintain a safe campus environment.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Identifying all potentially liable parties is a key step in building a civil hazing case. This often involves a thorough investigation to uncover all individuals and entities whose negligence or actions contributed to the harm. Potential defendants can include:

• Individual Students: These are the members or pledges who directly planned, organized, facilitated, or carried out the hazing acts. This also includes those who supplied alcohol, failed to intervene, or actively participated in a cover-up.
• Local Chapter / Organization: The particular fraternity, sorority, sports team, or club at the university campus can be sued as a legal entity. Often, and especially in Texas, officers or “new member educators” of the local chapter bear significant responsibility.
• National Fraternity / Sorority: Many local chapters are affiliates of larger national organizations. These national entities are often held liable if they failed to adequately supervise their chapters, enforce anti-hazing policies, investigate prior warnings, or if a pattern of similar hazing incidents across their chapters demonstrates foreseeability. They may try to distance themselves from local actions, but experienced attorneys can often prove their responsibility.
• University or Governing Board: While public universities in Texas (such as the University of Houston, Texas A&M, and UT Austin) may have some sovereign immunity protection, there are often exceptions for gross negligence, willful misconduct, and certain Title IX violations. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) typically have fewer immunity protections. Universities can be held liable if they knew or should have known about hazing, failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it, or deliberately ignored prior incidents. This can involve negligent supervision of student organizations, failure to enforce policies, or creating an environment where hazing was permissible.
• Third Parties: Depending on the specifics of the incident, other parties might be liable. This could include landlords of off-campus houses or event spaces where hazing occurred, bars or alcohol retailers who illegally served minors (under Texas dram shop laws), or even event organizers and security companies who failed in their duty to ensure safety.

Every hazing case is fact-specific, and the liable parties will vary depending on the circumstances. A comprehensive investigation is necessary for families from Goliad County and across Texas to identify all potential defendants and pursue full accountability.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The fight against hazing is a national one, with tragic incidents across the country shaping our understanding of the problem and driving legislative and legal changes. These high-profile cases serve as powerful precedents, demonstrating the severe consequences of hazing and the legal avenues available for victims and their families. For Goliad County families, these stories underscore the importance of vigilance and the critical role of legal action in demanding accountability.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most common and devastating hazing pattern involves forced or coerced alcohol consumption, leading to severe intoxication, injury, and often death. The following cases highlight this tragic trend:

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): 19-year-old Timothy Piazza died after a brutal “bid acceptance” night where he was forced to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol. Fraternity surveillance cameras captured him falling repeatedly, sustaining severe head injuries, while members delayed calling for medical help for nearly 12 hours. The aftermath led to over a thousand criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the enactment of Pennsylvania’s Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law. This case powerfully illustrated how extreme intoxication, a dangerous culture of silence, and a delay in seeking medical attention can be legally devastating for all involved.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): 20-year-old Andrew Coffey died from acute alcohol poisoning during a Pi Kappa Phi “Big Brother Night,” where pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them rapidly. The incident resulted in criminal hazing charges against multiple members and prompted FSU to temporarily suspend all Greek life, leading to significant policy overhauls. This case tragically demonstrated how ritualized, formulaic drinking nights are a recurring script for disaster in fraternity culture.
• Max Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Maxwell “Max” Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died with a blood alcohol content of 0.495% after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game. Pledges were forced to drink whenever they incorrectly answered questions about the fraternity’s history. His death spurred the passage of Louisiana’s felony hazing law, the Max Gruver Act. This case showed how public outrage following a clear hazing death can directly drive legislative change and strengthen anti-hazing laws.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): 20-year-old Stone Foltz also died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume nearly an entire bottle of whiskey during a “pledge night” ritual. Multiple criminal convictions followed for fraternity members involved, and his family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with approximately $7 million coming from the national Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity and nearly $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This landmark settlement demonstrated that even public universities can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities when hazing leads to death.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physical and ritualized hazing can also lead to catastrophic injuries or death, often involving a disturbing combination of physical abuse, psychological torment, and delayed medical care.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died after participating in a brutal “glass ceiling” ritual during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania. He was blindfolded, forced to carry a heavy backpack, and repeatedly tackled by fraternity members. Despite his severe injuries, members delayed calling 911 for hours, instead attempting to treat him themselves and remove incriminating evidence. This case led to criminal convictions for multiple members and, exceptionally, the national fraternity organization itself was convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, and banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years. It solidified the precedent that off-campus “retreats” are not a shield against liability and that national organizations are accountable for the actions of their chapters.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not confined to Greek life; it is a pervasive issue that can impact high-profile athletic programs, challenging the notion of “team building” and exposing systemic abuse.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): A massive scandal erupted at Northwestern following allegations from former football players of widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years. Multiple players filed lawsuits against the university and coaching staff, leading to the firing of head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who later settled a wrongful-termination lawsuit confidentially. This scandal made it clear that hazing extends far beyond Greek life, revealing how deeply entrenched systemic abuse can become even in major athletic programs, often protected by fear of reprisal and institutional silence.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies, while not occurring in Goliad County, offer critical insights for Texans concerned about hazing on campuses like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor. Common threads emerge: forced consumption of dangerous substances, extreme physical abuse, psychological coercion, deliberate delays in calling for help, and systematic cover-ups. These patterns demonstrate a disturbing predictability in hazing incidents.

The multi-million-dollar settlements and verdicts, criminal prosecutions, and legislative reforms that followed these cases often only occur after a tragedy has struck and legal action has been pursued. This underscores a somber reality: accountability and meaningful change rarely happen voluntarily. For Goliad County families sending their children to Texas universities, understanding these national lessons is vital. It means that when hazing impacts your family, you are not alone, and there is a well-established framework for seeking justice and preventing future harm.

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

For many Goliad County families, these prominent Texas universities are the higher education destinations of choice for their children. While each institution boasts its unique culture and traditions, all are grappling with the persistent challenge of hazing. Understanding the specific context, policies, and documented incidents at each of these schools provides a clearer picture for students and parents from Goliad County about the realities of campus life.

Our Houston-based firm, Attorney911, serves families throughout Texas, including those in Goliad County and the surrounding region. We understand that hazing at any of these Texas universities affects families in Goliad County just as profoundly as incidents closer to home. We are equipped to handle cases stemming from any of these campuses.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus, is a major destination for students across Texas, including those from Goliad County seeking opportunities in a metropolitan setting. UH boasts a diverse student body, an actively engaged Greek life with numerous fraternities and sororities, and a wide array of student organizations, including cultural groups and sports clubs. Its location in Houston makes it a hub of activity, but also presents challenges in overseeing student conduct both on and off campus.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston prohibits hazing in all forms, defining it broadly to include any act that endangers mental or physical health for the purpose of initiation, admission, or affiliation with an organization. This prohibition extends to activities both on and off campus. UH’s policy explicitly forbids forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, and acts causing mental distress. The university encourages reporting through the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). UH also maintains a section on its website outlining its hazing policy and, in compliance with state law, provides some information regarding student organization conduct.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UH has faced its share of hazing allegations and disciplinary actions against student organizations. One significant incident from 2016 involved the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity. Pledges allegedly suffered from severe food, water, and sleep deprivation during a multi-day event. The hazing culminated in an initiation where a student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being slammed onto a table or similar surface. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and a lengthy university suspension. Later disciplinary records have referenced other fraternities and organizations engaging in behavior “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” often involving alcohol misuse and policy violations, leading to suspensions or probation. While UH demonstrates a willingness to suspend chapters, the public detail available on specific incidents can sometimes be limited compared to other institutions.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For cases involving students from Goliad County at the University of Houston, the jurisdiction would typically involve agencies within Houston and Harris County. The UHPD would investigate incidents on campus, while the Houston Police Department would handle off-campus occurrences. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in state district courts in Harris County, and depending on federal claims (e.g., Title IX), potentially in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Potential defendants could include individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and potentially the university itself, as well as property owners for off-campus events.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

Parents and students from Goliad County involved with UH organizations should be proactive:

• Report any suspected hazing to the UH Dean of Students Office, the Office of Student Conduct, or UHPD immediately. Utilize online reporting forms or anonymous hotlines if preferred.
• Document everything. Screenshot group chats, text messages, and social media posts. Photograph any injuries from multiple angles.
• If you suspect an incident has been downplayed or ignored, speak with other parents or students. Attorney911, experienced in Houston-based hazing cases, can help uncover prior disciplinary actions and internal university files, which are often crucial for building a strong case.
• Understand that while UH has policies, these can be complex to navigate, and school administrators may prioritize institutional reputation. An independent legal perspective is essential to protect your child’s rights.

5.2 Texas A&M University

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M University, a storied institution renowned for its deeply entrenched traditions, military-style Corps of Cadets, and fiercely loyal alumni, attracts numerous students from Goliad County and across Texas. The campus culture emphasizes camaraderie, honor, and tradition, which, while beneficial in many aspects, has also historically provided fertile ground for hazing practices, particularly within certain organizations and the Corps. The intense loyalty expected of Aggies can sometimes contribute to a code of silence around hazing.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M prohibits hazing across all student organizations, explicitly covering both on-campus and off-campus activities. The university defines hazing in line with Texas Education Code, including mental and physical endangerment. Texas A&M maintains that it has a “zero-tolerance” policy, and its Division of Student Affairs provides reporting channels via the Office of Student Conduct and various administrative offices. The Corps of Cadets has its own internal disciplinary procedures. The university posts aggregated information on student conduct, but detailed incident reports can sometimes be challenging to access publicly.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced significant hazing allegations over the years. A prominent case from around 2021 involved the Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) fraternity, where pledges alleged being subjected to severe physical hazing, including being doused with substances like an industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in severe chemical burns requiring emergency skin graft surgeries. The fraternity chapter was suspended by the university, and the pledges subsequently sued for over $1 million.

More recently, in 2023, a lawsuit surfaced concerning the Corps of Cadets, where a cadet alleged degrading hazing rituals, including simulated sexual acts and being bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The student sought over $1 million in damages, highlighting the deep-seated nature of some “traditions” within the Corps. While A&M stated it addressed the matter internally, these cases underscore that both Greek life and the highly traditional Corps environment can harbor dangerous hazing.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Goliad County students attending Texas A&M, any hazing case would likely involve investigations by the University Police Department (UPD) for on-campus incidents or the College Station Police Department (and potentially Brazos County law enforcement) for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits against Texas A&M (a public institution) would need to carefully navigate sovereign immunity defenses, often focusing on exceptions like gross negligence or Title IX violations, or suing individual actors. Claims against fraternities, local chapters, or individuals would typically proceed in Brazos County civil courts.

5.1.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Goliad County with connections to Texas A&M should:

• Scrutinize the “traditions” described by their students, especially within the Corps of Cadets and B-CS Greek life, considering if they cross the line into hazing.
• Report concerns directly to the university’s Office of Student Conduct or Title IX Coordinator, and the UPD.
• Document all communications with university officials.
• Given A&M’s strong institutional pride, legal counsel can be invaluable in ensuring an objective investigation and protecting victims from subtle forms of pressure or retaliation. Our firm’s experience with the A&M system provides critical insight into navigating such cases.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin, the flagship institution of the UT System, is a major draw for students from Goliad County and across the state, known for its academic rigor, vibrant campus culture, and extensive Greek life. Located in the heart of Austin, the university fosters a lively atmosphere, but like any large institution with numerous student organizations, it faces ongoing challenges with hazing. UT’s large and diverse student body and complex organizational ecosystem require robust oversight to address hazing effectively.

55.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas at Austin maintains strict policies against hazing, defining it broadly in accordance with Texas law to cover mental and physical harm aimed at initiation or maintenance of membership. UT’s policies apply to all student organizations, both on and off campus. The university is notably proactive in its transparency, publishing a public Hazing Violations webpage (hazing.utexas.edu) that lists organizations, dates of incidents, a summary of the conduct, and the resulting disciplinary sanctions. Reporting channels are provided through the Office of the Dean of Students, the Student Conduct and Academic Integrity office, and the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD).

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public hazing log reveals a consistent pattern of incidents across various student groups. Recent entries include the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity (2023), which was sanctioned after new members were directed to consume excessive milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, actions found to constitute hazing. Other groups, including spirit organizations like the Texas Wranglers and various fraternities and sororities, have been disciplined for forced workouts, alcohol-related hazing, and punishment-based initiation practices. While UT’s transparency in publishing these violations is commendable and provides valuable information for Goliad County families, the recurring nature of these incidents underscores that hazing remains a persistent challenge despite university efforts.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

For students from Goliad County attending UT Austin, hazing incidents would typically be investigated by the UTPD for on-campus events or the Austin Police Department for off-campus occurrences. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in Travis County state district courts or, if federal claims are involved, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. As a public university, UT Austin could assert sovereign immunity, but exceptions (e.g., gross negligence, Title IX) might still allow for claims. Critically, the university’s own publicly recorded prior violations can serve as powerful evidence in civil lawsuits by demonstrating institutional knowledge and a pattern of unaddressed hazing behavior.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

Families in Goliad County whose children attend UT Austin should:

• Regularly check UT’s public Hazing Violations webpage to see if any organizations your student is considering or involved with have a history of misconduct.
• Familiarize yourselves with UT’s clear reporting procedures and encourage your student to use them if they experience or witness hazing.
• Be aware that even with UT’s transparency, repeated violations indicate ongoing issues that may require external legal intervention to achieve true accountability. Prior violations listed on UT’s log can be instrumental in building a civil case.
• We can provide specific guidance on how to preserve evidence and navigate the university’s disciplinary process while protecting your legal rights.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Southern Methodist University, nestled in Dallas, exudes an image of exclusivity and academic excellence, attracting students from Goliad County and affluent families seeking a rigorous private education. SMU is known for its strong Greek life, which plays a central role in the social fabric of the university. This vibrant Greek culture, while a draw for many, has also presented challenges in maintaining a hazing-free environment, despite the university’s commitment to student safety.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU strictly prohibits hazing across all student organizations, defining it according to Texas law to include any act that endangers mental or physical health for membership purposes. Its policies apply universally, regardless of whether the activity occurs on or off campus. SMU offers reporting channels through the Office of the Dean of Students, Student Conduct & Community Standards, and the SMU Police Department. The university actively promotes several anonymous reporting platforms and initiatives, such as “Real Response,” to encourage students to come forward with concerns.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

SMU has experienced various hazing incidents and has taken disciplinary action against student organizations. A notable case involved the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity in 2017, which faced allegations of severe physical hazing, including paddling, forced excessive alcohol consumption, and sleep deprivation. The chapter was suspended by the university for an extended period, with significant restrictions on its activities and recruitment until around 2021. While SMU, as a private institution, may not publicize its disciplinary details with the same level of transparency as state universities, such incidents highlight the ongoing battle against hazing within its Greek system.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Goliad County students attending SMU, hazing investigations would primarily involve the SMU Police Department for campus incidents and the Dallas Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits against SMU, being a private university, would not typically be shielded by sovereign immunity, potentially making the institution a more direct target for negligence claims. Cases would proceed in Dallas County state or federal courts. Our firm’s experience with the dynamics of private institutions like SMU, coupled with our expertise in complex litigation, is crucial for compelling discovery and holding all responsible parties accountable.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Goliad County whose children attend SMU should:

• Familiarize themselves with SMU’s specific hazing policies and the anonymous reporting options available.
• Understand that while private institutions have a strong interest in managing their public image, their non-profit or tax-exempt status does not exempt them from civil liability for hazing.
• Given the potential for limited public information from private universities, retaining legal counsel early can be vital for obtaining internal documents and evidence through the discovery process, which might otherwise remain private.

5.5 Baylor University

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University, a private Baptist university located in Waco, holds a unique position in Texas higher education, drawing students from Goliad County and faith-based communities statewide. Baylor’s strong religious identity influences its campus culture and student conduct policies. While committed to Christian values, Baylor’s history includes periods of intense scrutiny over its handling of student safety, particularly concerning sexual assault and, by extension, other forms of campus misconduct like hazing. This complex background creates a specific context for addressing hazing at the institution.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University unequivocally prohibits hazing, defining it in alignment with Texas law to encompass any act that causes mental or physical harm, linked to a student’s initiation, admission, or affiliation with an organization. The policy extends to on-campus, off-campus, and virtual activities. Baylor’s Office of Student Conduct and Case Management handles hazing reports, which can also be made to the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) or via anonymous reporting systems. The university publishes annual reports regarding student conduct, though specific details on hazing incidents may be generalized.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history includes instances of hazing, impacting various student groups. One instance involved the Baylor baseball program in 2020, where an investigation into alleged hazing activities led to the suspension of 14 players. These suspensions were staggered over the early season to mitigate impact, but the incident highlighted that hazing exists even within Baylor’s athletic departments, which operate under the university’s strict codes of conduct. This occurred amidst ongoing efforts by Baylor to reinforce student safety and accountability following criticisms relating to its handling of previous campus misconduct.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Goliad County students attending Baylor, hazing investigations would involve the BUPD for on-campus incidents or the Waco Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits against Baylor, as a private institution, would proceed in McLennan County state or federal courts and would not face the same sovereign immunity defenses as public universities. The unique aspect of litigating against Baylor involves understanding how its religious mission, institutional structure, and prior reputation for handling misconduct might influence legal proceedings.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

Families of Goliad County students at Baylor should:

• Review Baylor’s Student Conduct Code and specific hazing policies, understanding how the university’s values impact its approach to student organization behavior.
• Be mindful of Baylor’s commitment to “zero tolerance” and utilize the reporting channels provided, including the option to report anonymously.
• When evaluating legal options, it’s particularly important to consider Baylor’s specific institutional context and any past findings related to its oversight of student groups. Our firm understands how to navigate litigation against institutions like Baylor, compelling them to account fully for any failures in oversight that contribute to hazing.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

Understanding the role of national organizations is paramount when addressing hazing at Texas universities. For families in Goliad County, it’s not just about what happens at the local chapter; it’s about a pattern of behavior and an institutional knowledge that often extends far beyond a single campus.

Why National Histories Matter

Across UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, many fraternities and sororities are not standalone clubs. They are local chapters of vast national organizations—entities like Pi Kappa Alpha, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, Beta Theta Pi, Kappa Sigma, and Kappa Alpha Order are just a few examples. These national headquarters are critical players in the hazing landscape for several reasons:

• Institutional Knowledge: National organizations often possess extensive anti-hazing manuals and risk management policies. These policies are not theoretical; they exist because these organizations have, repeatedly, witnessed deaths, catastrophic injuries, and multi-million-dollar lawsuits stemming from hazing across their various chapters nationwide. They know the patterns: the “Big/Little” drinking nights, the paddling “traditions,” the humiliating rituals, and the predictable tragic outcomes.
• Foreseeability: When a local Texas chapter repeats a hazing script that has already led to injury, death, or major legal action in another state within the same national organization, it significantly strengthens the argument for foreseeability. It becomes far more difficult for the national organization to claim ignorance or that the incident was “unforeseeable.” This pattern evidence is invaluable in civil litigation, demonstrating that the national entity had prior notice of the dangers associated with its chapters’ behaviors.
• Duty to Supervise and Enforce: Nationals have a duty to supervise their chapters and enforce their own anti-hazing policies. When hazing occurs, a key legal question is whether the national organization adequately fulfilled this duty, or if its policies were mere “paper policies” – designed to look good but not meaningfully enforced.

For Goliad County families, this means that even if an incident is isolated to a specific campus, the national history of the fraternity or sorority can be a powerful tool in seeking accountability, especially when suing the national body for negligence or gross negligence.

Organization Mapping: Connecting Local Chapters to National Patterns

While it’s impossible to list every single Greek organization and their full history at each campus here, we can highlight major organizations present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor that have been involved in national hazing incidents, demonstrating the recurring nature of these problems.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor, the national Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity has a deeply troubling history of hazing. Cases like the tragic death of Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University (2021), where a pledge died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to drink nearly a bottle of whiskey, and the $14 million settlement in the David Bogenberger case (Northern Illinois University, 2012) for alcohol poisoning, demonstrate a clear national pattern of dangerous alcohol-related hazing. These incidents show that the national organization has been repeatedly warned about the dangers of its “pledge” events.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU, SAE has faced numerous hazing accusations and tragic outcomes nationwide. Historically, it was forced to eliminate its traditional pledge process in 2014 due to a pattern of deaths. More recently, lawsuits have alleged traumatic brain injuries in Alabama (2023) and, crucially, severe chemical burns at the Texas A&M chapter (2021), where pledges were doused with industrial-strength cleaner, requiring skin graft surgeries. The UT Austin chapter also faced a multi-million-dollar lawsuit in 2024 for an alleged assault by fraternity members. These incidents indicate a pervasive issue of physical and dangerous hazing within the national organization, including at its Texas chapters.
• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor, Phi Delta Theta’s national history includes the devastating death of Maxwell “Max” Gruver at Louisiana State University (2017) due to alcohol poisoning from a “Bible study” drinking game. This case directly led to Louisiana’s felony hazing statute, the Max Gruver Act, highlighting the severe consequences when their chapters engage in forced heavy drinking.
• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, and UT, the national Pi Kappa Phi fraternity was involved in the death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University (2017), where he died from alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. This incident highlighted how widespread this dangerous “tradition” is within fraternity culture.
• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU, Beta Theta Pi is tragically linked to the death of Timothy Piazza at Penn State (2017). This case, marked by a massive criminal prosecution and civil litigation, became a national symbol of extreme alcohol hazing, delayed medical care, and a horrific cover-up. Its prevalence at Texas schools means that students from Goliad County could unknowingly encounter a chapter with a national history of severe misconduct.
• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Chapters are active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor. Kappa Sigma has faced significant hazing litigation, including a $12.6 million jury verdict in the wrongful death case of Chad Meredith (University of Miami, 2001), who drowned after coerced drinking. More recently, the Texas A&M chapter faced allegations in 2023 of hazing causing rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown from extreme physical exertion). These cases underscore a consistent pattern of dangerous alcohol and physical hazing.
• Kappa Alpha Order (ΚΑ): Active at Texas A&M and SMU, Kappa Alpha Order (KA) has been involved in numerous hazing incidents, including the SMU chapter’s own suspension in 2017 for alleged padding, forced drinking, and sleep deprivation. This demonstrates a recurring theme of traditional, often physical, hazing tactics within the organization.

This brief overview is not exhaustive, but it illustrates how many organizations active at Texas universities have a national history of hazing that can inform and strengthen a hazing lawsuit against both local chapters and their national entities.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

The cumulative history of hazing within national fraternities and sororities, including those with chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, is not mere trivia. It forms a crucial part of a sophisticated legal strategy:

• Proving Foreseeability: When a national organization’s policy manual details the dangers of certain hazing practices, and then those exact practices lead to injury or death at a local chapter, it establishes that the incident was foreseeable. The national entity cannot claim ignorance.
• Demonstrating Gross Negligence: A pattern of ignoring warnings, failing to enforce policies, or imposing light penalties for severe past hazing incidents can demonstrate a national organization’s deliberate indifference to the safety of its pledges – a key element in proving gross negligence.
• Impact on Settlement and Insurance: This historical evidence significantly impacts settlement leverage. National organizations, facing strong evidence of foreseeability and a track record of harm, are often more inclined to negotiate substantial settlements. It also plays a role in navigating complex insurance coverage disputes, as insurers may struggle to deny coverage when the national’s negligence is clearly established.
• Driving Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, where a national organization has consistently disregarded known dangers, courts may award punitive damages. These damages are designed not just to compensate the victim but to punish the defendant and deter future misconduct, sending a clear message to other Greek organizations.

For families in Goliad County, this understanding of national hazing histories becomes a powerful tool in their pursuit of justice. It allows their attorneys to connect local actions to broader systemic failures, ensuring that the full weight of responsibility is placed where it belongs.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Experiencing hazing is traumatic. Deciding to pursue legal action can feel overwhelming. However, building a strong hazing case against powerful institutions, such as national fraternities, universities, or even student organizations, requires a meticulous approach to evidence collection, a clear understanding of potential damages, and a strategic legal plan. For families in Goliad County contemplating legal action, Attorney911 offers the expertise to navigate this complex process.

Evidence: The Foundation of Your Case

In a hazing lawsuit, evidence is paramount. It tells the story, establishes fault, and quantifies harm. Modern hazing, often camouflaged by digital communication and secrecy, requires sophisticated investigative techniques.

• Digital Communications: This is often the most critical category of evidence in today’s hazing cases.
  • GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, Fraternity/Sorority-Specific Apps: These platforms are goldmines. They reveal planning, intent, specific instructions, who was involved, and real-time events. Full threads with sender names, timestamps, and context are crucial.
  • Social Media (Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Facebook, X): Posts, stories, DMs, comments, and even location tags can reveal events, participants, and attitudes. Snapchat messages, while ephemeral, can sometimes be captured via screenshots or recovered from device backups.
  • Emails: Official chapter communications regarding “events,” instructions from officers, or correspondence with national organizations or university advisors can be vital.
  • Preservation is Key: The moment hazing is suspected, all digital data must be preserved. Screenshots, screen recordings, and professional forensic data extraction can often retrieve “deleted” information.
• Photos & Videos:
  • Content Captured During Events: Photos or videos taken by participants (often stored on their phones or personal cloud accounts) can provide irrefutable proof of hazing in progress, humiliations, or injuries.
  • Security Footage: Cameras at houses, event venues, or university buildings can capture arrivals, departures, physical altercations, or medical emergencies.
  • Injury Documentation: Clear, well-lit photos of injuries (bruises, burns, lacerations) taken immediately after the incident and then over several days to show progression, often with a ruler or coin for scale, are essential.
• Internal Organization Documents: These documents, often obtained through subpoenas during discovery, can expose institutional knowledge and culpability.
  • Pledge Manuals/Agendas: These may reveal “traditions” that constitute direct hazing or create a coercive environment.
  • Initiation Scripts/Ritual Books: Can detail forbidden or dangerous practices.
  • Risk Management Plans: Show what the organization said it would do versus what it actually did.
  • Communications: Emails or texts between local and national leadership can show a pattern of ignoring warnings or actively concealing hazing.
• University Records: Universities maintain records that can be instrumental.
  • Prior Conduct Files: History of disciplinary actions against the specific chapter or individuals, including probation, suspensions, and letters of warning.
  • Incident Reports: Records from campus police (UTPD, UHPD, BUPD, SMUPD) or student conduct offices.
  • Clery Act Reports: Public safety statistics that might reveal patterns of alcohol abuse, assaults, or other violations.
  • Title IX Investigations: If the hazing involved sexual misconduct, these records are crucial.
  • Public Records Requests (for public universities): Can sometimes compel the release of relevant documents.
• Medical and Psychological Records: These records quantify the harm suffered.
  • Emergency Room & Hospitalization Records: Detailed accounts of injuries, treatments, and medical findings, including toxicology reports (e.g., blood alcohol content, drug screenings).
  • Ongoing Treatment Notes: Records from surgeries, physical therapy, rehabilitation, and consultations with specialists.
  • Psychological Evaluations: Documentation from therapists, psychologists, or psychiatrists diagnosing conditions such as PTSD, major depressive disorder, or anxiety directly linked to the hazing trauma.
• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are powerful.
  • Other Pledges/Members: While initially fearful, many witnesses come forward.
  • Roommates, RAs, Coaches, Trainers, Bystanders: Individuals who observed behavioral changes, injuries, or specific incidents.
  • Former Members: Those who quit or were expelled for refusing to participate in hazing can offer invaluable insights into the organization’s culture.

Damages: Recovering What Was Lost

In a civil hazing lawsuit, the goal is to fully compensate the victim and their family for all losses suffered. These losses are categorized as economic and non-economic.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This includes all past medical expenses (ambulance, ER, ICU stays, surgeries, medications, therapy) and projected future costs for ongoing treatment. For catastrophic injuries (e.g., brain damage from alcohol poisoning), this can involve a “life care plan” to cover 24/7 care for life.
• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: This covers lost wages if the victim was employed, but also extends to the significant financial impact of missing semesters, dropping out, or delaying graduation. It can include reimbursement for lost tuition and scholarships, and potentially an economist’s projection of diminished future earning capacity if the injuries result in permanent disability or psychological trauma that affects career prospects.
• Non-Economic Damages: These are harder to quantify but represent the profound human cost of hazing.
  • Physical Pain and Suffering: From the immediate injuries to chronic pain.
  • Emotional Distress: Covering the deep psychological trauma, including PTSD, depression, severe anxiety, humiliation, and loss of dignity.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: Compensation for the inability to participate in activities, hobbies, or social life that were once cherished, and the profound impact on personal relationships and mental well-being.
• Wrongful Death Damages (for families): In the tragic event of a hazing-related death, surviving family members (parents, spouses, children) can recover for:
  • Funeral and burial costs.
  • Loss of financial support the deceased would have provided.
  • Loss of companionship, love, guidance, and society.
  • The grief and emotional suffering of the family members themselves.
• Punitive Damages: In Texas, punitive damages (also called exemplary damages) may be awarded in cases of gross negligence or intentional misconduct. These damages are not intended to compensate the victim, but to punish the defendant for egregious behavior and deter similar acts in the future. Proving that an organization or individual had prior warnings and deliberately disregarded safety, enabling hazing to continue, is often key to unlocking punitive damages.

It is important for Goliad County families to understand that we describe categories of damages, not guaranteed outcomes. The specific amount of damages will depend on the unique facts of the case and the severity of the harm.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Hazing cases often involve multiple defendants, each with their own legal counsel and insurance policies.

• Insurance Coverage: National fraternities, universities, individual students, and property owners typically carry various insurance policies (e.g., general liability, directors and officers, homeowner’s). These policies are designed to cover claims of negligence. However, insurers will aggressively try to:
  • Deny Coverage: Arguing that hazing falls under “intentional acts” or “criminal” exclusions, which many policies do not cover.
  • Limit Coverage: Attempting to pay out the smallest amount possible or pointing to policy exclusions related to specific types of misconduct.
  • Delay Payment: Using various tactics to prolong the claims process.
• Experienced Hazing Lawyers: Our firm, Attorney911, with Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney, possesses an insider’s understanding of how insurance companies operate. We know how to:
  • Identify all potential sources of insurance coverage: Leaving no stone unturned to find policies that might apply.
  • Challenge exclusions: Arguing that even if hazing was intentional, the institution’s failure to supervise or prevent it was negligent, which is often covered.
  • Negotiate aggressively: Leveraging strong evidence and national hazing patterns to compel fair settlements.
  • Pursue Bad Faith Claims: If an insurer unreasonably denies a valid claim, we can pursue additional lawsuits against the insurer for acting in bad faith.

Navigating these complexities requires specialized knowledge and experience. For Goliad County families, it means having an advocate who understands not just the trauma of hazing, but also the intricate legal and financial battles that follow.

Practical Guides & FAQs

When hazing strikes, families in Goliad County and their college-bound students need clear, actionable guidance. We aim to empower parents, protect students, and encourage witnesses to come forward.

8.1 For Parents: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

The subtle, insidious nature of modern hazing means parents must be vigilant. Here’s what Goliad County parents should know:

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert for a cluster of these signs, as they rarely appear in isolation:
  • Unexplained Injuries: Bruises, burns, cuts, or repeated “accidents” with vague or inconsistent explanations.
  • Extreme Fatigue: Sudden exhaustion, chronic sleep deprivation, or falling asleep frequently.
  • Drastic Mood Changes: Increased anxiety, depression, irritability, sudden withdrawal from family or old friends, or uncharacteristic secrecy about organization activities.
  • Constant Phone Use & Secrecy: Obsessive monitoring of group chats, fear of missing “mandatory” communications late at night, or deleting messages.
  • Academic Decline: Sudden drops in grades, missed classes, or prioritizing organization activities over academics.
  • “Us vs. Them” Mentality: Referring to non-members dismissively or expressing extreme loyalty to older members.
  • Unusual Financial Demands: Requests for money for unexplained “fines,” “gifts,” or unexpected large purchases for older members or events.
• How to Talk to Your Child: Open communication is key.
  • Ask Open-Ended Questions: Instead of “Are they hazing you?”, try open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with the fraternity/sorority? What are the new member activities like? Is there anything that makes you uncomfortable?”
  • Emphasize Safety Over Status: Reassure them that their well-being is paramount, far more important than “fitting in” or “getting initiated.”
  • Promise Unconditional Support: Let them know you will support them no matter what, and that leaving a dangerous situation is a sign of strength, not weakness.
• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize their immediate safety and well-being.
  • Seek Medical Care: Get them to an emergency room or doctor immediately. Insist that the medical provider document that the injuries were hazing-related.
  • Document Everything Thoroughly: Photograph all injuries from multiple angles and over several days. Screenshot any relevant text messages, group chats, or social media posts immediately. Write down a detailed account of what your child tells you, including names, dates, times, and locations.
  • Preserve Physical Evidence: Save clothes worn during the incident (do not wash them), or any objects given to them during the hazing.
• Dealing with the University:
  • Document Every Communication: Keep precise records of all interactions with university officials, including dates, times, names, and what was discussed.
  • Ask Direct Questions: Inquire about previous hazing incidents involving the same organization and what disciplinary actions were taken.
  • Be Aware of Institutional Bias: Universities often focus on internal processes and reputation management. Do not sign any waivers or agreements without legal counsel.
• When to Talk to a Lawyer: You should contact Attorney911 if:
  • Your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm.
  • You suspect the university or organization is minimizing the incident or trying to cover it up.
  • You feel pressured by the university or the organization to keep quiet or accept an inadequate resolution.
  • You need help preserving evidence, which disappears quickly.

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

For students, including those from Goliad County, who are experiencing or witnessing hazing, recognizing the danger and knowing your rights is vital.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? If you are asking this question, it’s a red flag. It is hazing if you feel:
  • Unsafe, humiliated, or coerced to do something you don’t want to do.
  • You are forced to consume alcohol, drugs, or painful substances.
  • You are subjected to physical pain, extreme exercise, or sleep deprivation.
  • The activity is hidden from the public or administrators.
  • You are told to keep secrets or lie about activities.
  • You are treated differently or exploited by older members.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Texas law explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. When you’re under immense peer pressure, facing threats of exclusion, or deeply desire to belong, your “agreement” is often coerced, not voluntary. You have the right to be safe, regardless of what they say you “agreed” to.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely:
  • Immediate Danger: If you are unsafe, call 911 immediately. Get to a safe location. Under Texas’s Good Samaritan law, you cannot be punished for calling for help in a medical emergency, even if you or others were consuming alcohol underage.
  • Quitting/De-Pledging: You have the legal right to leave any organization at any time. Inform the chapter president or new member educator in writing (email or text is best) that you are resigning. Do NOT go to “one last meeting” alone where you might be pressured or intimidated.
  • Reporting: You can report hazing anonymously through the National Anti-Hazing Hotline (1-888-NOT-HAZE), or directly to your university’s Dean of Students, Student Conduct Office, Title IX Coordinator (if sexual misconduct is involved), or campus police.
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Many schools and Texas law encourage reporting by offering protection to students who come forward in good faith, even if they were tangentially involved in activities that violated rules. Your safety and the safety of others take precedence.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses: A Path Towards Accountability

We understand that former members or witnesses of hazing may carry a burden of guilt or fear retaliation. However, your insights and testimony can be crucial in preventing future harm and holding responsible parties accountable.

• Your Role in Prevention: Your testimony and evidence can potentially save lives and lead to significant policy changes. While you may seek your own legal advice regarding your involvement, cooperating with authorities or victims’ families can be a powerful step towards justice and healing.
• Navigating Legal Issues: If you fear legal exposure due to past involvement, an attorney can advise you on your rights, potential immunity provisions for honest reporting, and how to engage with investigations or lawsuits in a way that minimizes your risk while maximizing information for the victim.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For families in Goliad County and throughout Texas facing hazing, understanding these common pitfalls is as important as knowing what to do:

1. Letting your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence: Parents often want to protect their child from further trouble, but deleting crucial digital evidence (group chats, texts, social media) looks like a cover-up, makes a case nearly impossible to prove, and can even be a criminal offense (obstruction of justice). Instead, preserve everything immediately, even if it feels embarrassing.
2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly: While tempting to seek immediate answers, confronting the organization directly allows them time to lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare defenses. Document everything first, then consult with Attorney911 before any direct engagement.
3. Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms: Universities may pressure families to sign waivers, settlement agreements, or “internal resolution” forms. Doing so can waive your legal rights to sue and often results in settlements far below the case’s true value. Do NOT sign anything without review from an experienced attorney.
4. Posting details on social media before talking to a lawyer: Sharing details on public social media can damage your case. Defense attorneys will screenshot everything, inconsistencies can hurt credibility, and you may inadvertently waive legal privileges. Document privately, and let your legal team manage public communications strategically.
5. Letting your child go back to “one last meeting”: “Talk to us before you do anything drastic” is a common tactic. These meetings are often designed to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can later be used against the victim. Once you’re considering legal action, all communication should go through your lawyer.
6. Waiting “to see how the university handles it”: Universities’ internal processes are rarely designed for full accountability or victim compensation. Evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, and the statute of limitations runs while investigations drag on. Preserve evidence NOW and consult a lawyer immediately.
7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer: Insurance adjusters are trained to minimize payouts. Recorded statements can be used against you. Politely decline to speak with them and refer them to your attorney.

8.5 Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities (UH, Texas A&M, UT) have some sovereign immunity defenses, but exceptions for gross negligence, willful misconduct, and Title IX violations exist. Private universities (SMU, Baylor) 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 can be. While basic hazing is a Class B misdemeanor, it becomes a state jail felony if it causes serious bodily injury or death. Individual officers of an organization also face misdemeanor charges for failing to report hazing that they are aware of.
• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”
  Yes. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts recognize that “agreement” under peer pressure, power imbalance, and fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent and does not absolve perpetrators of liability.
• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
  Generally, there is a 2-year statute of limitations from the date of injury or death in Texas. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known. In cases involving cover-ups or fraud, the statute may be tolled (paused). Time is critical; evidence rapidly disappears, and memories fade. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately.
• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location does not negate liability. Universities and national fraternities can still be held liable based on sponsorship, control, knowledge, and foreseeability, even if the incident occurred off-campus. Major hazing cases have resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments despite happening in private, off-campus settings.
• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  Most hazing cases settle confidentially before trial. Confidentiality clauses can be negotiated as part of the settlement. We prioritize your family’s privacy interests while relentlessly pursuing accountability for the harm caused.

Where the law is complex or depends on specific details, always advise contacting Attorney911 to review your child’s specific situation.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing case, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who understand how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911—the Legal Emergency Lawyers™—we bring unparalleled expertise and a relentless commitment to justice for victims of hazing across Texas, including families from Goliad County.

Our firm is uniquely qualified to handle complex hazing litigation due to a combination of experience and insight:

• Insurance Insider Advantage (Lupe Peña): Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable experience as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. This means she knows precisely how fraternity and university insurance companies evaluate (and undervalue) hazing claims. She understands their delay tactics, their coverage exclusion arguments, and their settlement strategies because she used to run their playbook. This insider knowledge gives our clients a distinct edge in navigating these often opaque financial battles.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions (Ralph Manginello): Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, has a proven track record of taking on formidable defendants. He was one of the few Texas attorneys involved in the historic BP Texas City explosion litigation, where he successfully challenged a billion-dollar corporation. With extensive experience in federal court (United States District Court, Southern District of Texas), Mr. Manginello is not intimidated by national fraternities, multi-billion-dollar universities, or their well-funded defense teams. We know how to fight powerful defendants and win.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We don’t settle cheap. We have successfully recovered millions for families in catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases. This experience means partnering with top economists, medical experts, and life care planners to accurately value severe injuries (like traumatic brain injuries from alcohol poisoning) and the immense loss of life. Our aim is to build cases that force accountability and secure comprehensive compensation for our clients.
• Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s membership in the prestigious Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides a deep understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual perspective is crucial for advising witnesses, former members, or victims when both civil damages and criminal accountability are on the table.
• Investigative Depth: We understand that hazing cases are won or lost in the details. We utilize a network of experts—including digital forensics specialists, medical professionals, and psychologists—to uncover critical evidence. We excel at obtaining deleted group chats, subpoenaing national fraternity records showing prior incidents, and compelling universities to release internal files through discovery or public records requests. We investigate as thoroughly as if your child’s life depended on it—because for many, it does.

The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, located in Houston, with additional offices in Austin and Beaumont, Texas, is a Texas personal injury firm with deep roots in this state. We are strategically positioned to serve families throughout Texas, including those in Goliad County and the surrounding region. We understand that hazing incidents at Texas A&M, UT Austin, UH, SMU, Baylor, or any other institution deeply affect families far beyond the campus borders.

We emphasize empathy and unwavering victim advocacy. We know that this is one of the hardest things a family can face, and our job is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another child. We are focused on thorough investigation and real accountability, not just quick settlements.

You don’t have to face this alone.

Call to Action for Goliad County Families

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

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

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We will listen to your story without judgment and with compassion.
• We will review any evidence you have collected (photos, texts, medical records, etc.).
• We will explain your legal options: whether a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither might be appropriate for your situation.
• We will discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
• We will answer your questions about legal fees. We work on a contingency fee basis – meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case.
• There is absolutely no pressure to hire us on the spot. We want you to take your time and make an informed decision.
• Everything you tell us is strictly confidential.

Your child’s future, and the safety of other students, may depend on how you respond to this emergency. The time to act is now.

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

Hablamos Español – Contact Lupe Peña at lupe@atty911.com for a confidential consultation in Spanish. We are dedicated to ensuring that language is never a barrier to justice.

Whether you’re in Goliad 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