Confronting Hazing in Texas: A Comprehensive Legal Guide for McLennan County Families

The air crackles with anticipation. It’s what they call “initiation night,” and your son, a bright-eyed student from McLennan County, is eager to join the ranks of [Fraternity or University Organization Name] at [A major Texas university, e.g., Baylor just a short distance from McLennan County]. He’s been looking forward to this for a semester, promising it’s “just brotherhood.” But as the night wears on, the atmosphere shifts. What began as playful games escalates into something darker: forced consumption of alcohol, degrading tasks, chanting, and a chilling group dynamic that demands silence, loyalty, and blind obedience. Someone gets hurt – a bad fall, a sudden collapse, a terrified whisper for help. Yet, amidst the chaos, no one wants to break the code, to call 911, to stop the “tradition” that has now gone terribly wrong. He’s caught between the desire to belong and his own survival.

This scenario, tragically, is not a fictional exaggeration. It’s a recurring nightmare for families across Texas, affecting students from McLennan County to the farthest corners of our state. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, understands this silent terror. We know the shame, the fear, and the profound confusion that grips parents and students when college life takes a dangerous turn.

This guide is designed to be a comprehensive resource for families in McLennan County and across Texas who are grappling with the complex issue of hazing. We aim to shed light on:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, moving beyond outdated stereotypes.
• The intricacies of Texas and federal anti-hazing laws and how they apply to your situation.
• Crucial lessons drawn from major national hazing cases and their direct relevance to Texas families.
• The specific hazing patterns and incidents that have occurred at prominent Texas universities, including the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University, which many McLennan County students attend or have ties to.
• The legal avenues and options available to victims and their families in McLennan County and throughout Texas.

While this article provides general information, it is not specific legal advice. We encourage you to seek a confidential, personalized consultation to discuss your unique circumstances. Our firm serves families throughout Texas, including those here in McLennan County, bringing our expertise to every corner of the state.

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 above all else.
• Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages (DMs) immediately.
  • Photograph any injuries from multiple angles and at different times.
  • Save any physical items that may be evidence (clothing worn, receipts, objects involved in the hazing).
• Write down everything while memory is fresh: who was involved, what happened, when and where it occurred.
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity, sorority, or organization directly. This can lead to evidence destruction or retaliation.
  • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal counsel.
  • Post details of the incident on public social media. This can compromise your case.
  • 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 surrounding incidents.
• Our team can help preserve crucial evidence and protect your child’s rights from the outset.
• Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for an immediate, confidential consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For many families in McLennan County, the word “hazing” might conjure images from decades past – a harmless paddle, some silly pranks. But in 2025, hazing is far more insidious, dangerous, and technologically advanced. It is not “just a dumb prank” or “partying too hard.” Hazing is any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, maintaining membership, or gaining status in a group, where that behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits a student.

It’s crucial to understand that a student’s coerced “agreement” to participate does not automatically make the activity safe or legal, especially when there’s an overwhelming power imbalance and intense peer pressure. What a student might feel compelled to do to “fit in” or “prove themselves” is rarely a true choice.

Main Categories of Hazing

Modern hazing takes many forms, often escalating through subtle, harassment, and violent tiers:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains one of the most common and deadly forms. It includes forced or coerced drinking of excessive amounts of alcohol, such as through chugging challenges, “lineups” where pledges are required to drink one after another, or drinking games that mandate rapid and dangerous consumption. It can also involve pressure to consume unknown or mixed substances, or to drink to a level far beyond what would be considered safe.
• Physical Hazing: Beyond the classic paddling that many associate with hazing, this category now encompasses severe physical abuse. Examples include beatings, punches, or kicks, as well as extreme calisthenics or “workouts” that push students far past safe physical limits, often termed “smokings.” It also frequently involves sleep deprivation over multiple days, food and water deprivation, and exposure to extreme environmental conditions like freezing temperatures or intense heat, or dangerous environments without proper safety measures.
• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These acts are designed to degrade and shame. They can involve forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (often demeaning), or forcing pledges into sexually suggestive positions. Such hazing may also include acts with racial, homophobic, or sexist overtones, the use of slurs, or forced role-play that reinforces stereotypes. Public humiliation, such as requiring embarrassing acts in public or participating in degrading skits, is also common.
• Psychological Hazing: This insidious form of abuse targets a student’s mental and emotional well-being. It includes verbal abuse, constant threats, intimidation, and social isolation. Victims may be forced to endure manipulation, forced confessions, or public shaming, often in group settings or on social media. This type of hazing erodes self-esteem and creates a climate of fear and anxiety.
• Digital/Online Hazing: With the ubiquity of smartphones and social media, hazing has moved into the digital realm. This involves group chat dares, “challenges,” and public humiliation through platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Discord, and even fraternity or university-specific apps. Pledges can be pressured to create or share compromising images or videos, respond instantly to messages at all hours, or be subjected to relentless online taunting.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

It’s a common misconception among McLennan County residents that hazing is primarily a “fraternity problem.” The reality is far broader. Hazing is a pervasive issue found across a vast array of student organizations:

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes social Greek letter organizations across all councils – Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations.
• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: In Texas, this is particularly relevant at institutions like Texas A&M, where tradition-heavy, military-style organizations can sometimes cross the line from discipline to hazing.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs, and Student Groups: Organizations like university spirit groups, campus service organizations, or exclusive social clubs may engage in initiation rituals that constitute hazing.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to baseball, cheerleading, and smaller club sports, hazing can occur within any athletic program.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign groups like marching bands or performance ensembles have seen hazing incidents.
• Academic, Cultural, and Professional Organizations: Any student group that practices an initiation, pledge, or new member process can, unfortunately, be a venue for hazing.

These practices persist despite clear prohibitions primarily due to social status, tradition, and intense secrecy. Pledges are often told that “everyone went through it,” “it builds brotherhood/sisterhood,” or that if they don’t participate, they’ll be left out. This powerful combination allows hazing to flourish even when students and organizations know it is illegal and expressly forbidden. For McLennan County families, it means vigilance is necessary across all aspects of campus life where their children are seeking to belong.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas is essential for McLennan County families. It’s a complex area involving both state and, increasingly, federal statutes, setting the stage for potential criminal charges and civil lawsuits.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

In Texas, anti-hazing provisions are primarily found within the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This code defines hazing broadly, covering intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committed acts that:

• Endanger the mental or physical health or safety of a student; OR
• Occur for the purpose of initiating, affiliating, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any student organization.

This definition clarifies several critical points for McLennan County parents:

• Mental or Physical Harm: Hazing is not limited to physical abuse. Psychological torment, extreme humiliation, and severe intimidation designed to break a student’s will also fall under the definition.
• Intent doesn’t require malice: The perpetrator does not need to intend to cause severe harm; acting recklessly—knowing the potential risk and proceeding anyway—is sufficient for the act to be considered hazing.
• Location is irrelevant: Whether the hazing occurs on or off campus, it is still defined as hazing under Texas law.
• “Consent” is not a defense: As explicitly stated in Texas Education Code § 37.155, a student’s perceived “agreement” to participate in hazing does not excuse the illegal nature of the act. This recognizes the inherent power imbalance and peer pressure involved.

Criminal Penalties for Hazing:

• Class B Misdemeanor (Default): Hazing that does not result in serious injury typically falls into this category, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes bodily injury requiring medical treatment, the penalty can escalate.
• State Jail Felony: Critically, if hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it can be prosecuted as a state jail felony, carrying more severe penalties.
• Failing to Report: Officers or members of an organization who know about hazing and fail to report it can face misdemeanor charges. Retaliation against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

It is vital for McLennan County families to understand the distinction between criminal and civil legal actions related to hazing:

• Criminal Cases: These are initiated by the state (prosecutors) against individuals or in some cases, organizations, for breaking the law. The primary goal is punishment, which can include jail time, fines, and probation. Hazing-related criminal charges often include direct hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, and even negligent homicide or manslaughter in cases of death.
• Civil Cases: These are lawsuits brought by the victims or their surviving families against those responsible, seeking monetary compensation and accountability for harm suffered. Civil claims typically focus on:
  • Negligence (failure to exercise reasonable care).
  • Gross Negligence (extreme disregard for safety).
  • Wrongful Death (when a death results from the hazing).
  • Negligent Hiring/Supervision (e.g., by a university or national organization).
  • Premises Liability (if the hazing occurred on unsafe property).
  • Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

It’s important that both criminal and civil cases can proceed simultaneously. A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for pursuing or winning a civil lawsuit, though a conviction can often strengthen the civil case.

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

Beyond state law, several federal mandates are increasingly shaping the landscape of hazing accountability:

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This significant federal law aims to compel greater transparency and prevention efforts. It requires colleges and universities that receive federal funding to publicly report hazing incidents, enhance hazing education and prevention programs, and maintain public data on hazing, with phased implementation expected by 2026. This will offer McLennan County families greater access to information about hazing incidents at Texas schools.
• Title IX: If hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, or gender-based hostility (e.g., forcing male pledges to strip or simulate sexual acts, verbal abuse against female members), Title IX obligations are triggered. This requires universities to investigate and respond promptly and effectively to eliminate the harassment, prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effects.
• Clery Act (Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act): This act mandates that universities collect and disclose certain campus crime statistics and security policies. While hazing is not a specific Clery Act crime, incidents often involve assault, alcohol and drug offenses, sexual offenses, or even manslaughter, which are Clery reportable crimes. This provides another layer of accountability for universities.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Determining liability in a civil hazing lawsuit involves identifying all parties who contributed to the harm through negligence, recklessness, or intentional acts. For McLennan County families, potential defendants often include:

• Individual Students: Those who planned, orchestrated, supplied alcohol, directly perpetrated the hazing acts, or actively participated in a cover-up.
• Local Chapter/Organization: The fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself, if it is a legally recognized entity. Officers or “pledge educators” who organized or oversaw the hazing can be held accountable, as can the chapter for its institutional failures.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters, which often collects dues, sets policies, and provides oversight to local chapters, can be held liable. This liability often hinges on whether the national organization knew or should have known about a pattern of hazing (within that chapter or others), and if they failed to take adequate preventative and corrective action.
• University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself, or its governing board (like the Texas A&M System or the University of Texas System), may be sued. Liability often arises from:
  • Negligence in supervising student organizations.
  • Failure to enforce anti-hazing policies, despite prior warnings.
  • Deliberate indifference to known hazing risks.
  • Exceptions to sovereign immunity (for public universities) for gross negligence or certain constitutional violations.
• Third Parties: This can include landlords or owners of off-campus houses where hazing occurred, bars or alcohol suppliers (under “dram shop” laws if they served obviously intoxicated individuals or minors), or even event organizers and security companies that fail to provide a safe environment.

Every case is distinct, and not every party will be found liable in every situation. A thorough investigation is crucial to identify all potentially responsible parties and build a robust case for accountability.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

When hazing incidents devastate McLennan County families, it’s natural to feel isolated. However, tragic hazing cases across the nation have established critical legal precedents, illuminated patterns of institutional failure, and ultimately led to multi-million-dollar settlements or verdicts. These “anchor stories” demonstrate the serious legal consequences that can arise from hazing and underscore why accountability is possible even against powerful university and fraternity systems.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Forced or excessive alcohol consumption remains the leading cause of hazing fatalities. These cases often share disturbing similarities: intense pressure to drink, inexperienced leaders, and a shocking delay in seeking medical help.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): In one of the most publicized hazing deaths, 19-year-old Timothy Piazza died after an alcohol-fueled bid-acceptance event. Security cameras captured him falling repeatedly after consuming dangerous amounts of alcohol, suffering traumatic brain injuries. Fraternity brothers delayed calling 911 for nearly 12 hours. The aftermath led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the powerful Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. This case profoundly demonstrated how extreme intoxication, a shameful delay in seeking medical care, and a pervasive “code of silence” can combine into a legally devastating scenario.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): During a “Big Brother Night,” pledge Andrew Coffey was given a handle of liquor and forced to drink it rapidly. He died from acute alcohol poisoning. The incident led to criminal hazing charges against multiple members, a temporary suspension of all Greek life at FSU, and a statewide anti-hazing movement in Florida. The pattern here—a formulaic, “traditional” drinking night quickly spiraling into catastrophe—is a recurring script for disaster.
• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver died with a blood alcohol content of 0.495% after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game where pledges were forced to drink heavily for incorrect answers. His death directly inspired the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana, which significantly strengthened hazing laws, including making felony hazing punishable by up to five years in prison. This case powerfully illustrates how legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of hazing’s lethal consequences.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): On a “Big/Little” pledge night, 20-year-old Stone Foltz was pressured to drink an entire bottle of whiskey. He died from alcohol poisoning. The case resulted in multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members, and a significant $10 million settlement was reached with his family, including nearly $3 million from Bowling Green State University, a public institution. This tragic outcome, and the corresponding financial and legal accountability, demonstrate that universities can face substantial consequences alongside fraternities for failing to prevent foreseeable hazing.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physical and psychologically brutal hazing rituals can also have fatal outcomes, often hidden away from public view.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng died after a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. Blindfolded and weighed down, he was repeatedly tackled during a ritual known as “the glass ceiling.” The delay in seeking help, coupled with attempts to cover up the incident, factored into multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members, and crucially, a criminal conviction against the national fraternity itself for aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter. The national organization was banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years. This case solidified the legal precedent that even off-campus “retreats” are not outside the purview of liability, and national organizations can be held directly responsible for their chapters’ conduct.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not exclusive to Greek life. Major athletic programs, often with immense financial resources and a strong emphasis on tradition, can also harbor deeply ingrained hazing cultures.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): This scandal brought widespread attention to hazing within elite college athletics. Former football players alleged a pattern of sexualized and racist hazing within the program over multiple years, including forced acts in the locker room. The allegations led to multiple lawsuits against Northwestern University and the coaching staff. The head coach, Pat Fitzgerald, was fired and later settled a wrongful-termination lawsuit confidentially. This case underscored that hazing extends beyond Greek life into major athletic programs, raising profound questions about institutional oversight and the depth of accountability needed.

What These Cases Mean for McLennan County Families

The common threads running through these national tragedies are chillingly consistent: forced drinking, physical abuse, prolonged humiliation, and perhaps most disturbingly, a culture of silence that often delays or denies crucial medical care and facilitates cover-ups.

For McLennan County families who may have a child at a Texas university, these cases are not distant tales. They represent powerful precedents. They demonstrate that:

• Reforms and multi-million-dollar settlements or verdicts often follow only after tragedy strikes and determined litigation uncovers the truth.
• Legal accountability can extend to individual students, local chapters, national organizations, and the universities themselves.
• Texas families facing hazing at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor are not alone. They operate within a legal landscape shaped by these national lessons, where experienced legal counsel can leverage these precedents to seek justice in Texas courts.

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

For families in McLennan County, understanding the specific context of hazing on Texas campuses, particularly those where many local students attend, is vital. While we are a Houston-based firm, our practice spans the entire state, and we are deeply familiar with the nuances of each major university’s culture, policies, and hazing challenges. McLennan County is home to Baylor University in Waco, making it especially important for local families to understand the dynamics at play, both at Baylor and other prominent Texas institutions.

Baylor University

As the proud home of Baylor University, McLennan County families have a direct connection to how this institution addresses student safety and misconduct.

Baylor University: Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor, a private Baptist university in Waco, McLennan County, is known for its strong Christian identity, robust athletic programs, and active Greek life. Its campus culture often emphasizes tradition, community, and service. Many McLennan County students attend Baylor, fostering a deep local connection to the university’s environment.

Baylor University: Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, defining hazing as any intentional or negligent act, committed by a student, on or off campus, that causes or reasonably creates a risk of mental or physical harm, for the purpose of initiation, admission, affiliation, or continuation of membership in any organization. Baylor’s policies emphasize a “zero tolerance” approach and provide reporting mechanisms through the Student Conduct office, Greek Life, and Baylor Police Department.

Baylor University: Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history, particularly its highly publicized football and Title IX scandals that raised questions about institutional oversight, colors the perception of how it handles student misconduct. While specific hazing lawsuits often remain confidential, documented incidents have included:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): 14 players were suspended following a hazing investigation within the baseball program. The suspensions were staggered to minimize visible impact but indicated a clear violation of university policy.
• Other instances of fraternities or student groups facing sanctions for alcohol-related hazing, forced physical acts, and public humiliation, aligning with national hazing patterns.

These incidents underscore that despite Baylor’s clear policies and strong religious branding, hazing remains a persistent challenge, reflecting broader issues of oversight and enforcement within collegiate environments. For McLennan County families, this highlights the necessity of looking beyond official pronouncements to understand actual practices.

How a Baylor University Hazing Case Might Proceed

Civil cases involving hazing at Baylor, a private university located right here in McLennan County, would typically be filed in McLennan County district courts. Investigations would involve Baylor University Police and potentially McLennan County Sheriff’s Office or Waco Police Department, depending on where the hazing occurred.

Potential defendants would include the individual students, the local chapter, the national organization (if applicable), and Baylor University itself, depending on proven negligence or deliberate indifference. Private universities like Baylor typically do not have the sovereign immunity protections that public universities in Texas possess, which can affect the legal strategy and potential for recovery.

What Baylor University Students & Parents Should Do

For McLennan County families with students at Baylor:

• Familiarize yourself with Baylor’s specific hazing policy, its definition of consent, and its reporting procedures, as published on the university’s student life website.
• Document everything: If you suspect or confirm hazing, collect screenshots of messages, photos of injuries, and write down details as soon as possible.
• Report internally: Use Baylor’s official reporting channels, including Student Conduct and the Baylor Police Department, but understand their primary goal is institutional discipline, not necessarily victim compensation.
• Seek external legal counsel immediately: If you believe your child has been harmed, contacting an experienced hazing lawyer before engaging deeply with university procedures can protect your legal rights and preserve crucial evidence. Our team at Attorney911 can provide guidance tailored to private university dynamics.

University of Houston (UH)

University of Houston: Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH, a large urban campus in the heart of Houston, offers a diverse academic and social environment. It serves a mix of commuter and residential students and boasts a vibrant Greek life landscape with active chapters across various councils. Many students from McLennan County and Central Texas enroll at UH, making its campus safety a concern for families across the state.

University of Houston: Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UH strictly prohibits hazing, both on and off campus. Their policy aligns with Texas law, forbidding acts that endanger mental or physical health for initiation or affiliation purposes. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). UH also provides an online form for anonymous reporting and publicly lists some disciplinary actions related to hazing.

University of Houston: Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UH has faced its share of hazing incidents, demonstrating the persistent challenges even at institutions with clear prohibitions:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2016): One of the more severe incidents involved pledges allegedly subjected to food, water, and sleep deprivation during a multi-day event. Tragically, one student suffered a lacerated spleen, believed to have occurred after being forcefully impacted on a surface during a hazing activity. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges, ultimately resulting in university suspension.
• Other fraternities and student organizations at UH have received disciplinary actions for behavior deemed “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort,” often involving alcohol misuse, forced calisthenics, or degrading tasks, leading to suspensions or probation.

These examples highlight UH’s willingness to implement disciplinary actions, including chapter suspensions, but also reveal the ongoing struggle to eradicate hazing entirely.

How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

A hazing case originating at UH would involve initial investigations by UHPD or, if off-campus, by the Houston Police Department. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in Harris County district courts. Potential defendants would include the individual students, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and potentially the University of Houston, which as a public institution, benefits from sovereign immunity in many contexts, though exceptions for gross negligence or certain constitutional claims can apply. Our experience in Houston-based hazing cases provides a unique advantage in navigating these specific jurisdictional and procedural complexities.

What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For students and families connected to UH:

• Understand UH’s specific policies: Familiarize yourself with the university’s anti-hazing regulations and reporting procedures outlined on the Dean of Students website.
• Document diligently: Gather all possible evidence, including screenshots of group chats, photos of injuries, and detailed notes of events, dates, and names.
• Report through official channels: Utilize UH’s designated reporting avenues like the Dean of Students office or UHPD, while consulting legal counsel about how to best phrase complaints to protect your rights.
• Contact hazing lawyers experienced in Houston: Given UH’s location, having legal representation deeply familiar with Houston-area courts and police departments, and with significant experience against public universities, is crucial. Our team at Attorney911 operates directly within this legal environment.

Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University: Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M in College Station attracts a significant number of students from McLennan County, drawn to its rich traditions, strong academic programs, and the famed Corps of Cadets. The culture is often characterized by a fierce sense of loyalty, tradition, and community spirit. Its Greek life is vibrant, and the Corps of Cadets introduces a unique military-style dynamic that also necessitates anti-hazing vigilance.

Texas A&M University: Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M rigorously prohibits hazing in all its forms, both on and off campus, for any university-affiliated group or activity, including Greek organizations and the Corps of Cadets. Their policy emphasizes that consent is not a defense and that all students are protected. Reporting can be made through the Dean of Student Life, the Office of Fraternity & Sorority Life, the Corps of Cadets leadership, or the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD).

Texas A&M University: Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M’s commitment to tradition must occasionally contend with allegations of hazing, especially within its powerful student organizations:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (2021): In a particularly disturbing lawsuit, two pledges alleged they were subjected to a severe hazing ritual where substances including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit were poured on them, causing severe chemical burns that required skin graft surgeries. The pledges sued the fraternity for over $1 million, and the chapter was suspended for two years by the university.
• Corps of Cadets (2023): A former cadet filed a federal lawsuit alleging degrading and explicit hazing, including simulated sexual acts and being bound in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The lawsuit underscored that even highly structured, disciplinary environments like the Corps can face challenges with hazing.
• Aggie Bonfire Collapse (1999): While not traditional hazing, the collapse of students’ Bonfire stack, which killed 12 and injured 27, highlighted the extreme risks associated with student-led traditions and institutional oversight. Multiple lawsuits against university officials resulted in settlements exceeding $6 million, demonstrating liability when the university fails to adequately supervise high-risk student activities.

How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing cases originating at Texas A&M would involve investigations by UPD and potentially Brazos County law enforcement. Civil claims would primarily be heard in Brazos County district courts. Given A&M’s status as a public institution, considerations of sovereign immunity, as detailed in Texas law, would play a role, making exceptions for gross negligence or constitutional violations critical. McLennan County families with students attending A&M should understand that pursuing claims against such a large public university requires specialized legal expertise.

What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For McLennan County families with strong ties to Texas A&M:

• Know the specific policies: Be thoroughly familiar with Texas A&M’s hazing policies, including those specific to the Corps of Cadets, and their detailed reporting procedures.
• Actively monitor: Pay close attention to any changes in your student’s behavior or physical appearance that might suggest hazing.
• Preserve digital evidence: Given today’s landscape, immediate preservation of social media, group chat messages, and any photographic or video evidence is paramount.
• Consult attorneys with public university experience: Our firm’s background in complex litigation against large institutions, including previous involvement in significant cases like the BP Texas City explosion, equips us specifically to navigate the complexities of claims against large public universities and their associated entities.

University of Texas at Austin (UT)

University of Texas at Austin: Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin is a premier public university in the state, drawing students from McLennan County and across the nation. Its vibrant campus life includes a massive Greek system, numerous student organizations, and deeply ingrained traditions. The university’s sheer size and influence mean that its policies and handling of student conduct have broad impact.

University of Texas at Austin: Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

UT Austin has a robust and transparent anti-hazing policy, clearly defining hazing in line with Texas law. Critically, UT maintains a publicly accessible Hazing @ UT website (hazing.utexas.edu) that lists student organizations found responsible for hazing violations, along with the nature of their misconduct and the sanctions imposed. This unique level of transparency is a powerful tool for McLennan County families. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students, Student Conduct and Academic Integrity, and the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD).

University of Texas at Austin: Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public hazing log reveals a recurring pattern of violations across various types of student organizations:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): The UT chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) was disciplined after new members were directed to consume milk excessively and perform strenuous calisthenics, found to be hazing. The chapter was placed on probation and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (January 2024): This chapter faced a major lawsuit from an Australian exchange student who alleged assault by fraternity members at a party, resulting in severe injuries including a dislocated leg, broken ligaments, fractured tibia, and a broken nose. The chapter was already under significant suspension for prior hazing/safety violations, underscoring a pattern of misconduct.
• “Absolute Texxas” Spirit Group (2022): This well-known spirit organization, not a Greek group, was disciplined for hazing violations that included alcohol/drug misconduct, blindfolding, kidnapping, and degrading new members. This highlights that hazing is not confined to fraternities.

UT’s public reporting of these incidents provides an invaluable resource for McLennan County families. When a pattern of violations is clearly documented, it strengthens arguments regarding university and organizational foreseeability.

How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing investigations at UT would typically involve UTPD and Austin Police Department. Civil lawsuits would be heard in Travis County district courts. As a public university, UT Austin benefits from sovereign immunity, making the specifics of negligence claims and potential exceptions critical for any legal action. However, UT’s own public records of hazing violations can be powerful evidence to demonstrate prior knowledge and a failure to enforce policies.

What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

For McLennan County families whose children attend UT Austin:

• Review the Hazing @ UT website: Regularly check hazing.utexas.edu for documented violations, specific organizations involved, and their sanctions. This is real intelligence for prospective students and current families.
• Preserve digital evidence rigorously: UT’s campus, like others, is saturated with digital communication. Teach your student about instant screenshotting and secure storage if they encounter concerning content.
• Contact a lawyer with Texas public university experience: Our firm understands the intricacies of suing large state universities and can deftly navigate the public record system to build a comprehensive case.

Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University: Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU, a private university in Dallas, is often associated with affluent students, a strong sense of tradition, and a prominent Greek life. Many McLennan County families may send their children to SMU, valuing its academic reputation and Dallas location. The social scene, particularly Greek life, plays a significant role in student experience.

Southern Methodist University: Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

SMU strictly prohibits hazing, in line with Texas law and federal guidelines. Their policies cover all student organizations, on or off campus, and emphasize consequences for both individuals and organizations. SMU provides reporting through the Dean of Students, the Office of Fraternity & Sorority Life, and the SMU Police Department. They also offer anonymous reporting options.

Southern Methodist University: Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

SMU’s Greek system has faced its own share of hazing allegations and disciplinary actions:

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): This fraternity chapter faced significant scrutiny and ultimately suspension after reports of severe hazing, including alleged paddling, forced excessive alcohol consumption, and sleep deprivation. The chapter was placed under recruitment restrictions for several years.
• Other fraternities and sororities at SMU have faced disciplinary actions related to alcohol violations and conduct deemed hazing, leading to suspensions, loss of privileges, and mandatory educational programs.

These incidents, while not always as publicly detailed as those at public universities, indicate a persistent challenge that SMU, like other private institutions, continues to address.

How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Civil lawsuits involving SMU would generally be filed in Dallas County district courts. Investigations would likely involve SMU Police and Dallas Police Department. As a private institution, SMU typically does not benefit from sovereign immunity, which can simplify some aspects of legal action compared to public universities. However, private institutions often have extensive internal legal counsel and insurance resources that require a robust legal response.

What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For McLennan County families with students at SMU:

• Be aware of SMU’s specific reporting mechanisms: Understand how to use their anonymous reporting systems and official conduct processes.
• Document everything internally: Since SMU’s disciplinary records may not be as publicly transparent as UT’s, meticulous internal documentation (screenshots, eyewitness accounts, medical records) becomes even more crucial.
• Engage experienced counsel early: Our firm understands how to pursue civil claims against private universities, compel discovery, and navigate the unique legal and reputational considerations that can arise.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

The fraternity and sorority system, a cornerstone of social life at campuses like Baylor in McLennan County and across Texas, often operates under a veneer of tradition and camaraderie. Yet, beneath this surface, a darker history of hazing—perpetuated by specific national organizations—can create a dangerous environment for new members. Understanding this dual reality is critical for McLennan County families.

Why National Histories Matter

Most fraternities and sororities with chapters at Baylor, UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU are part of national organizations. These national headquarters (HQs) play a crucial role. They:

• Develop extensive anti-hazing manuals and risk management policies. These policies exist because these organizations have a documented history of hazing, including catastrophic injuries and deaths, at chapters nationwide.
• Are often acutely aware of the patterns of hazing within their organizations: ritualistic forced drinking, physical beatings, sleep deprivation, and psychologically degrading acts.

This history of knowledge is a cornerstone of civil liability. When a Texas chapter of a national organization, say a Pi Kappa Alpha chapter at Baylor or a Sigma Alpha Epsilon chapter at UT, repeats hazing tactics that have led to harm or death at other chapters across the country, it demonstrates foreseeability. The national organization had prior knowledge of the dangerous scripts within its system and arguably failed to implement effective preventative measures. This pattern evidence is invaluable in supporting claims of negligence, gross negligence, and even arguments for punitive damages against the national entity.

Organization Mapping: Connecting Local Chapters to National Patterns

While we cannot list every single chapter and incident, certain national fraternities have highly publicized track records of hazing that are directly relevant to families in McLennan County whose children might join these organizations at Texas schools.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike): This fraternity has chapters at Baylor, UH, Texas A&M, and UT. Nationally, Pike has been involved in several severe hazing incidents. Most notably, the Stone Foltz death at Bowling Green State University (2021) involved a forced drinking ritual on “Big/Little” pledge night that led to his death from alcohol poisoning. Earlier, David Bogenberger died in 2012 at Northern Illinois University under similar circumstances, resulting in a $14 million settlement. These cases demonstrate a clear, ongoing pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing that national Pike could not claim to be unaware of.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU, SAE has a national history marred by multiple hazing-related deaths and severe injuries. Incidents include:
  • A traumatic brain injury lawsuit filed in 2023 at the University of Alabama, alleging severe hazing.
  • A $1 million lawsuit at Texas A&M (2021) where pledges allegedly suffered chemical burns from industrial cleaner and other substances poured on them during hazing, requiring skin grafts. This directly impacts McLennan County families with A&M students.
  • A $1 million lawsuit at UT Austin (January 2024) where an exchange student alleged severe assault by members, leading to multiple broken bones.
  • The Carson Starkey death at Cal Poly (2008), where a pledge died from alcohol poisoning, prompting significant reforms and the creation of a national anti-hazing awareness group by his family.
    These incidents showcase a deeply entrenched pattern across the organization.
• Phi Delta Theta: Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU, this fraternity was at the center of the Max Gruver hazing death at LSU (2017), where forced drinking during a “Bible study” game led to his fatal alcohol poisoning. This case led to Louisiana’s felony hazing statute, the Max Gruver Act.
• Pi Kappa Phi: With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, and UT, Pi Kappa Phi was involved in the Andrew Coffey hazing death at Florida State University (2017), also due to forced, excessive alcohol consumption. This incident spurred statewide anti-hazing movements.
• Beta Theta Pi: Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and SMU, this fraternity is infamous for the Timothy Piazza hazing death at Penn State (2017), where delayed medical care after his fatal falls led to criminal prosecution and Pennsylvania’s powerful anti-hazing law.
• Kappa Sigma: Chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor. This organization was involved in the Chad Meredith drowning death at the University of Miami (2001), where a pledge with a high BAC drowned after being pressured to swim across a lake, resulting in a $12.6 million jury verdict and a Florida anti-hazing law named in his honor. More recently, allegations of severe injuries including rhabdomyolysis from extreme physical hazing at Texas A&M (2023) highlight ongoing issues.
• Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI): Present at Texas A&M and UT, this fraternity was connected to the devastating Danny Santulli case at the University of Missouri (2021), where a pledge suffered severe, permanent brain damage from forced alcohol consumption during “pledge dad reveal” night. His family secured multi-million-dollar settlements from 22 defendants.
• Sigma Chi: With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT, and Baylor, Sigma Chi was involved in a case at the College of Charleston (2024) where a family reportedly received more than $10 million in damages for severe physical and psychological hazing, one of the largest known settlements for such harm.
• Pi Delta Psi: While not listed at direct Texas campuses, the conviction of this national fraternity itself in the Chun “Michael” Deng death (Baruch College, 2013) from physical hazing at an off-campus retreat sets a powerful precedent for national organizational liability.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

These national patterns provide critical ammunition for legal strategies in McLennan County and across Texas. They help demonstrate that:

• Certain national organizations, including those with chapters at Baylor and other Texas universities, had clear, repeated warnings of dangerous hazing practices within their system.
• It is plausible to argue that these organizations failed to meaningfully enforce their anti-hazing policies, and that their responses to prior incidents were insufficient to deter future harm.
• This significantly impacts settlement leverage, making it harder for national organizations to claim ignorance or disavow responsibility.
• It can influence insurance coverage disputes, as it challenges claims that hazing was an “unforeseeable” or “unauthorized” act.
• In some cases, it can bolster arguments for punitive damages, demonstrating a pattern of reckless indifference to known risks.

For McLennan County families, this means that even if a local chapter claims “this has never happened here before,” the national organization’s history can paint a very different, and legally significant, picture. Our firm leverages this deep understanding of national hazing patterns to build robust cases for our clients.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

For McLennan County families seeking justice after hazing, the path often feels daunting. The institutions involved—universities and national fraternities—are powerful, well-resourced, and accustomed to defending themselves. However, with the right legal strategy, meticulous evidence collection, and a clear understanding of potential damages, a strong case can be built for accountability and compensation.

Evidence: The Foundation of Your Case

In today’s digital age, evidence in hazing cases is rapidly evolving. We meticulously investigate every avenue, knowing that a comprehensive collection of evidence is paramount:

• Digital Communications: This is often the most critical category. Group chats, direct messages (DMs), and online interactions across platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, and various fraternity/sorority-specific apps provide a direct window into the planning, execution, and cover-up of hazing. Our team works to preserve the entire thread of conversations, including sender names, time stamps, and context. Even deleted messages can sometimes be recovered through digital forensic experts.
• Photos & Videos: Visual evidence is incredibly powerful. This includes content filmed by perpetrators during the hazing (often shared in group chats or private social media), as well as footage of injuries, humiliating acts, or forced drinking. Security camera footage from university buildings, off-campus houses, or businesses can also be pivotal.
• Internal Organization Documents: Subpoenas can uncover pledge manuals, initiation scripts, “traditions” lists, and internal communications (emails/texts from officers) that explicitly detail hazing activities or efforts to conceal them. National organization policies and training materials, alongside their prior incident reports, are essential in demonstrating foreseeability.
• University Records: Through discovery and public records requests (especially for public universities like Baylor within McLennan County), we obtain records of prior conduct violations, probation or suspensions against the perpetrating organization, incident reports from campus police or student conduct offices, Clery reports, and other internal communications about the organization. UT Austin’s publicly listed hazing violations, for example, provide invaluable pattern evidence.
• Medical and Psychological Records: These document the full extent of physical and emotional harm. This includes emergency room reports, ambulance records, hospitalization notes, surgical reports, physical therapy records, and toxicology reports (for alcohol or drug use). Critically, psychological evaluations and therapy records (for PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidality) are vital for establishing non-economic damages.
• Witness Testimony: The accounts of other pledges, active members, roommates, Resident Advisors (RAs), coaches, trainers, or bystanders are crucial. For McLennan County families, we understand the reluctance of students to come forward, but often, once a legal team is involved, others are willing to speak confidentially.
• Physical Evidence: This can include clothing worn during the hazing (which may contain stains), paddles or other objects used in the hazing, or receipts for forced purchases (e.g., alcohol, humiliating costumes).

Damages: Recovering What Was Lost

Hazing devastates lives, causing not only physical and emotional pain but also significant financial burdens. Our focus is on recovering comprehensive damages that address every aspect of your family’s loss. Appendix E outlines these in detail, but in summary, they include:

• Economic Damages (Quantifiable Financial Losses):
  • Medical Expenses: All past and future costs, from emergency care and hospitalization to ongoing therapies, medications, and life care plans for catastrophic injuries.
  • Lost Income & Earning Capacity: Compensation for lost wages, tuition for missed semesters, lost scholarships, delayed graduation, and—for permanent injuries—diminished earning potential over a lifetime.
  • Other Economic Losses: Property damage or relocation costs if a student must transfer schools.
• Non-Economic Damages (Subjective, But Legally Compensable):
  • Physical Pain & Suffering: For injuries like broken bones, burns, internal injuries, and chronic pain.
  • Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: For conditions such as PTSD, depression, anxiety, humiliation, loss of dignity, and the profound trauma inflicted.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: For the inability to participate in activities, social withdrawal, and the overall degradation of the college experience.
• Wrongful Death Damages (For Families):
  • Funerals and burial costs.
  • Loss of financial support the deceased would have provided.
  • Loss of companionship, love, and society for parents, siblings, or spouses.
  • Grief and emotional suffering for surviving family members.
  • Note that in Texas, only certain family members can bring wrongful death claims.
• Punitive Damages: In cases of egregious, reckless, or malicious conduct, punitive damages may be awarded to punish defendants and deter future hazing. This is particularly relevant when defendants ignored repeated warnings or attempted cover-ups.

We do not guarantee specific dollar amounts, as every case is unique. However, our firm’s track record in multi-million dollar wrongful death settlements in previous complex litigation cases demonstrates our capacity to vigorously pursue the full measure of justice your family deserves.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

A critical part of our strategy involves identifying and pursuing all responsible parties, and their respective insurance coverage. National fraternities and universities typically carry substantial insurance policies designed to cover such incidents. However, these insurers will often:

• Argue that hazing or “intentional acts” are explicitly excluded from coverage.
• Attempt to deny coverage or refuse to defend the organization, aiming to minimize their payout.

This is where Attorney911’s unique advantage, particularly with Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney, becomes indispensable. We know their playbook because we used to run it. Our team understands how to:

• Identify all potential insurance policies, including individual homeowner’s policies of perpetrators, local chapter policies, national policies, and university umbrella policies.
• Challenge claims of exclusions by arguing that the organization’s negligent supervision (rather than simply the “intentional” act of hazing) is covered.
• Force insurers to defend their policyholders, leveraging our deep understanding of insurance law and bad faith claim tactics.

For McLennan County families, this means we analyze every angle to ensure maximum recovery, leaving no potential source of compensation unturned.

Practical Guides & FAQs

Hazing is a crisis that demands immediate, informed action. For McLennan County families, navigating the aftermath can feel overwhelming. Here, we offer practical guidance for parents, students, and witnesses, along with answers to common legal questions.

For Parents

No parent in McLennan County wants to imagine their child experiencing hazing, but knowing the signs and steps to take is crucial.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be alert to changes in your child’s behavior. Look for:
  • Unexplained injuries or frequent “accidents” with unconvincing explanations.
  • Extreme fatigue or noticeable sleep deprivation, constant exhaustion.
  • Drastic changes in mood, increased anxiety, depression, or withdrawal from family and old friends.
  • Sudden secrecy about organization activities, using phrases like “I can’t talk about it.”
  • Constant secret phone use for group chats, fear of missing “mandatory” events or messages.
  • Pressure to spend excessive money or make strange purchases.
  • Decline in academic performance or unexplained absences from classes.
• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not accusation.
  • Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with the fraternity/sorority?”
  • Emphasize their safety and well-being over any organization “loyalty.”
  • Reassure them that you will support them, no matter what, and help them get out safely.
• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize medical care above all else.
  • Get them to a doctor or emergency room immediately. Ensure the medical provider is aware that hazing is suspected.
  • Document everything: Take clear photos of injuries, screenshot any text messages or group chats, and write down every detail your child shares (dates, times, names, locations, specific acts).
  • Save any physical evidence, like damaged clothing or receipts.
• Dealing with the University:
  • Document every communication with university administrators (who you spoke to, when, what was said).
  • Specifically inquire about prior incidents involving the same organization and the university’s response.
  • Do not sign any waivers or agreements offered by the university without consulting legal counsel first.
• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child has experienced significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing or actively hiding what happened, it’s time to promptly contact an experienced hazing attorney.

For Students / Pledges

For students from McLennan County newly navigating campus life, differentiating between tradition and hazing can be difficult. Your safety and well-being are paramount.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition?: Ask yourself: Do I feel unsafe, humiliated, or coerced? Am I being forced to drink or endure pain that I wouldn’t freely choose? Is this activity hidden from the public or administrators? If you answered yes to any of these, it’s likely hazing. True traditions do not diminish your dignity or endanger your health.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: You might feel you “agreed” to certain activities to join the group. However, the law, and organizations like ours, recognize the immense power dynamics at play. The fear of exclusion, peer pressure, and the strong desire to belong mean that “consent” in hazing situations is often not truly voluntary. You are the victim, not an accomplice.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the right to leave a dangerous situation at any time. Speak to a trusted adult outside the organization—a parent, RA, or professor. To report privately or anonymously, utilize campus reporting channels (Dean of Students, Title IX Coordinator, campus police) or the National Anti-Hazing Hotline (1-888-NOT-HAZE). If you fear retaliation, report those fears to university officials.
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Across Texas, laws and many university policies provide good-faith reporter immunity or medical amnesty. This means if you or your friends call for medical help in an emergency, even if underage drinking or hazing was involved, you often cannot be criminally prosecuted or face severe university discipline for seeking aid. Your life is not worth a false sense of loyalty.

For Former Members / Witnesses

You may carry a heavy burden of guilt or fear if you were involved in hazing or witnessed it. However, your testimony can prevent future harm and save lives.

• Acknowledge Your Role: It’s okay to feel conflicted. Many individuals regret their past participation in hazing. Your willingness to speak out can be a profound step toward accountability and healing.
• Your Testimony Matters: Your firsthand account and any evidence you possess (screenshots, photos, knowledge of past incidents) can be invaluable in building a civil case. It can help establish patterns of behavior, liability, and the truth of what happened, preventing another student from being harmed.
• Seek Legal Advice: You may have concerns about your own legal exposure. Our attorneys can provide confidential legal advice, explaining your rights and potential protections as a witness or, in some cases, an individual who participated in the hazing. Cooperating with victims’ attorneys can be a vital step toward personal redemption and preventing future tragedies.

Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For McLennan County families, the aftermath of a hazing incident is fraught with emotional and legal complexities. Making certain mistakes early on can severely jeopardize any future legal claim. Based on our experience, here are the critical errors to avoid:

MISTAKES THAT CAN RUIN YOUR HAZING CASE:

1. Letting your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence.

   • What families might think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble, or I don’t want these embarrassing details revealed.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This can be seen as obstruction of justice or active concealment of evidence, which looks like a cover-up and makes a legal case nearly impossible to prove.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even content that feels embarrassing or incriminating. A skilled attorney knows how to responsibly handle and present such evidence. Our video on client mistakes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY) explains this in more detail.

2. Confronting the fraternity/sorority directly.

   • What families might think: “I need to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
   • Why it’s wrong: A direct confrontation will likely prompt them to immediately contact their own lawyers, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defense, making our job much harder.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in private, then call a lawyer to strategize before any direct confrontation.

3. Signing university “release” or “resolution” forms.

   • What universities do: Many universities will pressure families to sign waivers or agree to “internal resolution” processes.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue a civil lawsuit, and these internal resolutions often involve outcomes that are far below the actual value of your case, focusing on damage control for the institution.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or any organization without an experienced attorney reviewing it first.

4. Posting details on social media before talking to a lawyer.

   • What families might think: “I want people to know what happened and warn others.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Anything posted publicly can be used by defense attorneys, creating inconsistencies that hurt credibility, and potentially waiving any legal privileges you may have.
   • What to do instead: Document privately and confidentially. Let your lawyer control the public messaging and strategy if and when it becomes appropriate.

5. Letting your child go back to “one last meeting” with the organization.

   • What organizations say: “Just come talk to us before you do anything drastic; let’s clear the air.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This is often a tactic to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that could harm your child’s legal position.
   • What to do instead: Once you are considering legal action, all communication from your child to the organization (or vice-versa) should go through your attorney.

6. Waiting “to see how the university handles it” internally.

   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating; please let us handle this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Evidence rapidly disappears, witnesses graduate and scatter, and the statute of limitations can run out. Universities’ internal processes are designed to protect the institution, not necessarily to secure maximum compensation for victims.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW and consult a lawyer immediately. The university’s internal process is separate from securing real legal accountability.

7. Talking to insurance adjusters without a lawyer.

   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim and help out.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Any recorded statement can be used against you. Early settlement offers are almost always lowball attempts designed to shortchange victims before they understand the full extent of their damages.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline any conversations and state, “My attorney will contact you.”

By avoiding these critical mistakes, McLennan County families can significantly strengthen their position and protect their rights in the complex aftermath of a hazing incident. Our video on using your phone to document evidence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs) provides practical guidance on immediate evidence preservation.

Short FAQ

“Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities within Texas, such as Baylor University (McLennan County), UH, Texas A&M, and UT, typically have sovereign immunity protections. However, exceptions exist for gross negligence, certain constitutional violations, and when suing individual employees in their personal capacity. Private universities like SMU 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. Under Texas law, hazing is generally a Class B misdemeanor. However, it becomes a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individual officers of an organization can also face misdemeanor charges for failing to report hazing. See Texas Education Code § 37.152 for details.

“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 and juries understand the immense peer pressure, power imbalance, and fear of exclusion that compel students to participate. What appears to be “agreement” is often coerced.

“How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit?”
Generally, in Texas, you have two years from the date of injury or death to file a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this if the injury or its cause wasn’t immediately known. In cases involving cover-ups or fraud, the statute may be “tolled” (paused). Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses forget, and organizations destroy records. Do not delay; call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately. Learn more in our video “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c).

“What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
The location of the hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities or organizations can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and the foreseeability of hazing activities, regardless of whether they occur on or off campus. Many major hazing cases resulting in multi-million-dollar judgments have occurred at off-campus houses or private retreats.

“Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
Most hazing cases, particularly civil lawsuits, result in confidential settlements before going to trial. Our firm prioritizes your family’s privacy and can often work to keep sensitive details and your child’s identity out of the public eye while still pursuing full accountability. We can request sealed court records and confidential settlement terms.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing crisis, particularly at a Texas university, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need tenacious 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 experience and a relentless commitment to accountability for McLennan County families and those across Texas.

From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including McLennan County and the surrounding region. We understand that hazing at Texas universities, including Baylor, affects families in McLennan County and across the state, and we are ready to bring our expertise directly to you.

Our firm offers unique qualifications for hazing cases:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/), previously worked as an insurance defense attorney at a national defense firm. She understands precisely how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims. She knows their delay tactics, their coverage exclusion arguments, and their settlement strategies—because she used to run their playbook. This insider knowledge gives us a critical edge against the well-funded defense teams of national organizations and universities.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Ralph P. Manginello, our managing partner (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/), has extensive experience in complex litigation, including being one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation. This means we are not intimidated by, and know how to effectively litigate against, national fraternities, universities, their powerful legal teams, or billion-dollar corporations. Our federal court experience (including the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) prepares us for the most challenging cases.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have a proven track record of securing substantial multi-million dollar settlements and verdicts in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. This includes working with economists to value loss of life and for complex life care plans for victims with permanent brain injuries or disabilities. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force accountability and truly compensate for profound loss.
• Criminal + Civil Expertise: Ralph’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides a crucial understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation. This dual perspective allows us to advise witnesses, former members, or even family members with potential dual criminal/civil exposure, offering holistic guidance.
• Investigative Depth: We leverage a vast network of experts, including medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists. Our team has a proven ability to obtain hidden evidence, from deleted group chats and social media content to subpoenaed national fraternity records and internal university files. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

We intimately understand how fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments operate behind closed doors, often valuing tradition and secrecy above safety. We know how to investigate modern hazing, uncover hidden evidence, and navigate complex insurance coverage disputes. We balance victim privacy with the need for public accountability, understanding the nuances of Greek culture and how to prove coercion.

We know this is one of the hardest things a McLennan County family can ever face. Our job is to get you answers, hold the responsible parties accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We are not about bravado or quick settlements; we are about thorough investigation, unwavering advocacy, and real, lasting accountability.

Call to Action

If you or your child experienced hazing at Baylor University, UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or any other Texas campus, we want to hear from you. Families in McLennan County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers and accountability when their trust in an institution is betrayed.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We will listen to what happened without judgment, explain your legal options, and help you decide on the best path forward for your family.

What you can expect in your free consultation:

• We will listen attentively to your story and the specific details of what occurred.
• We can review any evidence you’ve already collected, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• We will explain your potential legal options: pursuing a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither, based on your goals.
• We’ll discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
• We’ll answer your questions about costs, as we operate on a contingency fee basis – meaning we don’t get paid unless we win your case (learn more about contingency fees at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc).
• There’s no pressure to hire us on the spot; we encourage you to take the time you need to make this crucial decision.
• Everything you tell us during the consultation is strictly confidential.

Do not face this alone. The institutions involved have legal teams ready to defend them. You and your family deserve equally strong, experienced advocates.

Contact us today for immediate guidance:

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 – For consultation in Spanish, please contact Lupe Peña directly at lupe@atty911.com. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

Whether you’re in McLennan County, supporting a student at Baylor, 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