In Tom Green County, Attorney911 offers expert legal help for fraternity and sorority hazing cases. Our lawyers, with 25+ years experience and former insurance defense insight, handle University hazing injury and wrongful death claims. We have federal court experience taking on national fraternities and universities, evidenced by BP Explosion litigation. Our team, with HCCLA criminal defense and civil wrongful death expertise, has achieved multi-million dollar results for cases at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor. We are evidence preservation specialists. Hablamos Español. Free consultation. Contingency fee: No win, no fee. Call 1-888-ATTY-911.

Navigating the Shadow of Hazing: A Comprehensive Guide for Tom Green County Families

The crisp Texas air crackles with excitement on a cool autumn night. Under the glow of string lights at an “unofficial” off-campus house near a Texan university, a new member, eager to belong, is handed a bottle of liquor. Chants echo through the room, pressuring them to drink beyond their limits. Laughter slowly turns to concern as the student stumbles, then collapses. A wave of panic ripples through the group. To call for help would mean “getting the chapter shut down,” sacrificing the brotherhood they’ve been taught to revere. This isn’t just a story; it’s a scenario that tragically plays out year after year, just perhaps at a campus where many Tom Green County families send their children to pursue higher education, whether it’s an institution closer to home like Angelo State University or further afield at Texas A&M, UT Austin, or the University of Houston.

This could happen at any Texas university—including schools where Tom Green County families send their children, from Ballinger to Christoval, Bronte to Water Valley, or nearby San Angelo. The painful reality of hazing extends far beyond campus boundaries, reaching into communities across our state. When a child from Tom Green County is harmed by hazing, the impact is felt not only by their immediate family but by their hometown, their social circles, and their future.

This guide is for you, families in Tom Green County and across Texas, who need to understand the complex, often hidden world of hazing. We will explore:

• What hazing looks like in 2025, moving beyond outdated stereotypes.
• The critical Texas and federal legal frameworks designed to combat hazing.
• How national hazing incidents provide crucial lessons for Texas families.
• Insights into specific hazing issues at major Texas universities: the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M University, the University of Texas at Austin (UT), Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor University, and how these affect students from Tom Green County.
• The intricate histories of fraternities and sororities, and their legal implications.
• Our strategic approach to building a strong hazing case, focusing on evidence, damages, and strategy.

This article offers general information and insights, but it is not specific legal advice. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, stands ready to evaluate individual cases based on their unique facts. We serve families throughout Texas, including those here in Tom Green County and the surrounding communities of Sterling County, Concho County, Irion County, Coke County, and Runnels County. We aim to empower you with knowledge and, when necessary, to fight for justice and accountability.

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 is deleted:
  • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages immediately.
  • Photograph injuries from multiple angles.
  • Save physical items (clothing, receipts, objects).
• Write down everything while your memory is fresh (who, what, when, where).
• Do NOT:
  • Confront the fraternity/sorority.
  • Sign anything from the university or insurance company.
  • Post details on public social media.
  • Let your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence.
• Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours. Evidence disappears fast (deleted group chats, destroyed paddles, coached witnesses). Universities move quickly to control the narrative. We can help preserve evidence and protect your child’s rights. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Tom Green County families, understanding hazing means looking beyond the outdated clichés of harmless pranks or movie scenes. Modern hazing is far more insidious, often cloaked in claims of “tradition” or “bonding,” yet it still leads to severe psychological trauma, physical injury, and even death. It exploits a new member’s desire to belong, turning that vulnerability into a weapon.

Hazing is any forced, coerced, or strongly pressured action tied to joining, keeping membership, or gaining status in a group, where the behavior endangers physical or mental health, humiliates, or exploits. This means if a student is subjected to harmful activities, whether they “agreed” or not, it can still be considered hazing due to the inherent power imbalance and peer pressure. Your child’s “consent” often isn’t true consent in the eyes of the law.

Main Categories of Hazing

Hazing has evolved, often becoming more subtle and technologically sophisticated to evade detection.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is arguably the most common and deadly form of hazing. It involves forced or coerced drinking, often through dangerous games like “lineups” where pledges consume excessive amounts of alcohol, chugging contests, or specific “traditions” that dictate rapid consumption. There’s also the insidious pressure to consume unknown or mixed substances, putting students at severe risk of overdose or poisoning.
• Physical Hazing: Beyond the classic paddling, physical hazing includes extreme calisthenics, often called “workouts” or “smokings,” pushed far beyond safe limits. This can lead to exhaustion, rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown), and other serious injuries. Sleep deprivation, food and water deprivation, and exposure to extreme temperatures or dangerous environments are also common tactics designed to break down new members.
• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This deeply degrading category includes forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts, and grotesque poses like the “roasted pig.” It can involve wearing embarrassing costumes, acts with racial or sexist overtones, slurs, or role-playing that demeans and dehumanizes. The psychological scars from such acts can last a lifetime.
• Psychological Hazing: This form of abuse targets a new member’s mental and emotional well-being. It involves verbal abuse, threats, and deliberate social isolation from non-group members. Manipulation, forced confessions, and public shaming—whether in person or through social media—are tactics used to exert control and erode self-esteem.
• Digital/Online Hazing: With the rise of technology, hazing has moved into the digital realm. Group chat dares, “challenges,” and public humiliation spread through Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Discord, and other platforms. This includes pressure to create or share compromising images or videos, or participate in online behaviors that could damage a student’s reputation or sense of self.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not confined to one type of organization or student group, nor is it limited by geography—it can affect students from Tom Green County at campuses across the state. While fraternities and sororities (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, multicultural) are frequently associated with hazing, the problem is far broader:

• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: These environments, often with strong traditions and hierarchical structures, can be prone to hazing. For students from Tom Green County attending institutions like Texas A&M, this type of hazing can be particularly impactful.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs: Groups like university spirit organizations, tradition-rich social clubs (e.g., Texas Cowboys-type groups), and other selective student bodies.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to baseball, swimming, and cheerleading squads, hazing in sports teams remains a serious, often underreported issue.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign organizations such as marching bands or theater groups can foster hazing traditions.
• Other Student Organizations: Some service, cultural, and academic organizations, especially those with selective membership processes or a strong sense of internal hierarchy, can fall prey to hazing.

The common threads running through these diverse groups are social status, tradition, and intense secrecy. These elements create a powerful force that perpetuates hazing, even when everyone “knows” such practices are illegal and dangerous. The drive to belong, coupled with the fear of ostracization or punishment for speaking out, traps new members in cycles of abuse.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

For families in Tom Green County dealing with hazing, understanding the legal landscape is crucial. Texas has specific laws intended to curb hazing, and federal regulations also play a significant role. These laws exist to hold individuals and institutions accountable, providing avenues for both criminal prosecution and civil recourse.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has clear anti-hazing provisions within its Education Code (Chapter 37, Subchapter F). Our law broadly defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by anyone, alone or with others, directed against a student, that:

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

This definition is critical because:

• It explicitly covers physical acts like beatings or forced exercise, but also psychological harm such as extreme humiliation or intimidation.
• It applies whether the hazing occurs on or off campus, so location is not a defense.
• It states that even if the person meant no malice, recklessness (knowing the risk and doing it anyway) is enough to meet the legal definition.
• Crucially, the law explicitly states that “consent” is not a defense. This means “I agreed to it” does not make the act legal or safe when there’s peer pressure and a power imbalance.

Texas law outlines:

• Criminal Penalties: Hazing can lead to criminal charges, ranging from a Class B Misdemeanor (for hazing that doesn’t cause serious injury) up to a State Jail Felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who are members or officers and fail to report hazing can also face misdemeanor charges. Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor.
• Organizational Liability: Beyond individuals, organizations (like fraternities, sororities, athletic teams, or clubs) can be prosecuted if they authorized or encouraged the hazing, or if an officer acting in an official capacity knew about it and failed to report it. Penalties can include fines up to $10,000 per violation and loss of university recognition.
• Reporter Protections: Texas law also offers limited immunity for individuals who in good faith report a hazing incident to university authorities or law enforcement. This aims to encourage reporting without fear of liability stemming from the act of reporting itself. Furthermore, in medical emergencies, Texas law and university policies often grant amnesty to students who call 911 in good faith, even if underage drinking or hazing was involved—prioritizing saving a life.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

When hazing occurs, there can be two parallel legal pathways:

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (a prosecutor) and aim to punish individuals and sometimes organizations for breaking the law. Potential outcomes include jail time, fines, or probation. Hazing-related criminal charges often include direct hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, or even manslaughter or negligent homicide in fatal incidents.
• Civil Cases: These are initiated by victims or their surviving family members. The primary goal is to obtain monetary compensation for damages suffered and to hold responsible parties accountable. Civil lawsuits focus on legal theories like negligence, gross negligence, wrongful death, negligent hiring or supervision, premises liability, and emotional distress. Crucially, a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. The standards of proof differ, and a civil case can proceed even if no criminal charges are filed or result in a conviction.

Both types of cases aim for justice, but for different purposes: punishment in criminal matters and compensation and accountability in civil litigation.

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

Beyond state law, federal regulations also impact how hazing is addressed, particularly at institutions receiving federal funding.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation requires colleges and universities to be more transparent about hazing incidents. Institutions must publicly report hazing violations and related disciplinary actions, strengthen their hazing education and prevention efforts, and maintain public data on hazing. This is being phased in by around 2026 and will provide clearer data for Tom Green County families researching campus safety.
• Title IX and Clery Act: If hazing involves elements of sexual harassment, sexual assault, or gender-based hostility, the federal Title IX statute is triggered, requiring universities to investigate and respond to ensure equal educational access. The Clery Act mandates that colleges and universities disclose campus crime statistics, including those that may overlap with hazing incidents like assault, alcohol-related offenses, and drug violations. These federal laws create additional layers of accountability and avenues for redress for victims of hazing in Tom Green County and across the nation.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Determining who is responsible in a hazing case can be complex, often extending beyond the immediate individuals involved. Multiple parties can be held liable in a civil hazing lawsuit:

• Individual Students: The students who actively planned, carried out, supplied alcohol, or participated in the hazing, or even those who helped cover it up, can be named as defendants.
• Local Chapter/Organization: The fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself, as a legal entity, can be sued. This often includes officers or “pledge educators” who directly orchestrated the hazing.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: The national headquarters, which typically sets policies, collects dues, and oversees local chapters, can be held liable. Their liability often hinges on whether they knew or should have known about prior hazing incidents within their chapters (a concept known as “foreseeability”) and whether they adequately enforced their own anti-hazing rules.
• University or Governing Board: Depending on the specific facts, a university or its governing board may face liability. This usually involves theories of negligence (failing to supervise, allowing known hazing to continue, or failing to warn), and in some cases, allegations of gross negligence or even civil rights violations (particularly if Title IX is involved). Their liability can depend on whether they had prior warnings, how well they enforced their policies, and their overall response—or lack thereof—to hazing.
• Third Parties: Other entities can sometimes be brought into a lawsuit. This can include landlords or owners of properties where hazing occurred, bars or alcohol providers (under “dram shop” liability laws if they overserved minors or obviously intoxicated individuals), or even security companies and event organizers.

Every case is unique, and not every party will be liable in every situation. An experienced hazing attorney can identify all potentially responsible parties and the strongest legal theories to pursue for families in Tom Green County.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

When Tom Green County families grapple with the devastating effects of hazing, it’s important to understand that these are not isolated incidents. Major national cases have established patterns, set precedents, and often forced legislative and institutional change. These anchor stories demonstrate the severity of hazing, the typical scripts it follows, and the profound legal implications that echo in courts across Texas and the nation.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most tragic and common pattern in hazing involves excessive, forced alcohol consumption, often leading to alcohol poisoning and death.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after a “bid-acceptance” night filled with extreme drinking. Fraternity brothers filmed his subsequent falls and injuries, waiting nearly 12 hours before calling for medical help. This case led to dozens of criminal charges against fraternity members, extensive civil litigation, and the creation of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania, a landmark piece of legislation. This case starkly illustrates how extreme intoxication, institutional delay in calling 911, and a pervasive culture of silence can converge with devastating legal consequences.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old FSU junior, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and forced to consume them rapidly. This incident resulted in felony hazing charges for multiple members, and a temporary ban on all Greek life at FSU, leading to significant policy overhauls. For Texas families, this highlights how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster, with little variation from campus to campus.
• Max Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge from Phi Delta Theta, died after a brutal “Bible study” drinking game where incorrect answers to questions resulted in forced drinking. His blood alcohol content was nearly 0.50%. This tragedy led to the enactment of Louisiana’s Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing law that makes such acts punishable by significant prison time. This case profoundly demonstrates how public outrage and clear proof of hazing can, and often does, drive legislative change across states.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to drink an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” pledge night. Following a lengthy legal process, multiple criminal convictions were secured against fraternity members. Civilly, Bowling Green State University agreed to a nearly $3 million settlement with Stone’s family, and additional multi-million-dollar settlements were reached with the fraternity’s national organization and individuals involved. This signals that not only are fraternities liable, but universities can also face significant financial and reputational consequences for their role in failing to prevent such tragedies.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physically brutal and ritualized hazing remains a dangerous constant.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Chun “Michael” Deng, a pledge of Pi Delta Psi fraternity, died from a traumatic brain injury suffered during a “glass ceiling” ritual at an off-campus retreat in the Pocono Mountains. Blindfolded and carrying a heavy backpack, he was repeatedly tackled. Fraternity members delayed calling for help. Following this incident, multiple members were criminally convicted, and the national fraternity itself was found guilty of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, leading to its ban from Pennsylvania for 10 years. This case clearly shows that off-campus “retreats” are not safe havens for hazers; they can be as dangerous or worse than on-campus parties, and even national organizations can face severe criminal and civil sanctions for events occurring far from campus.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not exclusive to Greek life; it infiltrates other highly selective and tradition-bound organizations, particularly athletic programs.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): Multiple former football players at Northwestern came forward alleging widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over many years. This scandal resulted in the firing of long-time head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who later filed a wrongful-termination lawsuit. Numerous other players filed civil lawsuits against the university and coaching staff. This starkly reminds us that hazing is not confined to fraternities; it can permeate big-money athletic programs, raising profound questions about institutional oversight and accountability.

What These Cases Mean for Tom Green County Families

These anchor stories reveal disturbing common threads: forced drinking, physical abuse, psychological torment, humiliation, a pervasive culture of secrecy, and critically, delayed or denied medical care that often exacerbates injuries and fatalities. While legal reforms have intensified and multi-million-dollar settlements have been achieved, these measures too often come only after tragedy has struck and families have pursued costly and emotionally draining litigation.

For families in Tom Green County—whether their children attend Angelo State University in San Angelo, a school much closer to home, or a more distant campus like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor—these national lessons are profoundly relevant. The dynamics, the cover-ups, and the legal strategies all inform how hazing cases proceed in Texas courts. These painful precedents demonstrate that while the fight for justice is never easy, there is a legal framework and a path to accountability for victims and their families.

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

For Tom Green County families, understanding the unique environment, policies, and incident histories of Texas’s major universities is paramount. Many students from across our region matriculate at these institutions, and the hazing landscape at each can vary. While Angelo State University provides a closer option for many in Tom Green County, the issues at the larger institutions are often more visible due to their size and the extensive Greek life on offer. Even if your child attends Angelo State, or another smaller college, these case studies from the bigger schools illustrate prevailing trends and the legal mechanisms that apply across the state.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus, blends a mix of commuter and residential students. Its Greek life is notably active, encompassing various fraternities and sororities, including traditional, multicultural, and NPHC councils. Beyond Greek organizations, UH hosts a diverse array of student groups, from cultural associations to sports clubs, all of which fall under the university’s anti-hazing umbrella. For Tom Green County families considering UH, understanding this dynamic environment is key.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH has a dynamic and diverse student body, fostering an active campus life. Its urban setting means many off-campus events, including those with hazing implications, occur throughout the vast metropolitan area of Houston and Harris County. This can sometimes complicate jurisdiction for investigations.

5.1.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, prohibiting any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation, affiliation, or continued membership. This applies whether the acts occur on or off campus, a critical point for groups utilizing off-campus houses or venues. UH explicitly bans forced consumption of alcohol, food, or controlled substances; sleep deprivation; physical mistreatment; and any acts designed to inflict mental distress. Students and families can report hazing incidents through the Dean of Students office, the Office of Student Conduct, or the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). UH also provides an online reporting form and an anonymous tip line.

5.1.3 Example Incident & Response

A notable incident involving the Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) fraternity at UH in 2016 highlighted campus hazing. Pledges allegedly suffered severe deprivations of food, water, and sleep during “new member” activities. One student reportedly suffered a lacerated spleen after being slammed onto a table or similar surface. This incident led to both criminal misdemeanor hazing charges against individuals and the fraternity’s suspension by the university. While UH does not have the extensive public hazing violation log like UT Austin, disciplinary records often reflect suspensions and probations for violations involving alcohol misuse and acts “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort.” Such incidents underscore the persistent challenges despite clear policies.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

When hazing occurs at or near UH, involved agencies could include UHPD for on-campus incidents, and/or the Houston Police Department and the Harris County Sheriff’s Office for off-campus events within Houston or the broader Harris County area. Civil lawsuits arising from hazing at UH would typically be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County, such as the Harris County District Courts. Potential defendants often include the individual students involved, the local chapter itself, the national fraternity or sorority, and potentially the University of Houston, depending on the specifics of the university’s knowledge and response. Property owners of off-campus houses might also face liability.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For Tom Green County students attending UH, or their parents:

• Familiarize yourself with UH’s official anti-hazing policies and reporting procedures.
• Document and report any suspicious activities immediately to the Dean of Students or UHPD, even anonymously.
• Preserve all evidence, especially digital communications, if your child experiences or witnesses hazing.
• Contact a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases, like Attorney911, to understand how evidence of prior complaints or disciplinary actions from UH’s records could strengthen a case.
• Prioritize medical attention for any injuries, no matter how minor they seem, and ensure the medical record accurately reflects the cause.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a sprawling campus with a deeply ingrained culture of tradition and a unique blend of Greek life, the Corps of Cadets, and numerous student organizations, presents a distinct hazing landscape. Many students from Tom Green County, particularly those with a history of family ties to the Aggie traditions, aspire to attend Texas A&M in College Station. For these families, understanding hazing here means appreciating the interplay between Greek organizations and the prominent Corps of Cadets.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M is renowned for its strong traditions, its large and influential Greek system, and the iconic Corps of Cadets. The culture often emphasizes loyalty, brotherhood/sisterhood, and intense pride. This environment, while fostering strong bonds, also creates conditions ripe for hazing, where “tradition” can be misused to justify dangerous practices, particularly within the Corps and Greek organizations.

5.2.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

Texas A&M maintains a strong anti-hazing policy that is clearly communicated to students. Hazing is prohibited in any form, on or off campus, by any student organization, including the Corps of Cadets and Greek fraternities and sororities. The university explicitly outlines behaviors that constitute hazing, covering physical, psychological, and alcohol-related activities. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students’ office, Student Conduct, the Texas A&M Police Department (TAMU Police), and an anonymous hazing hotline. The university also publishes an annual report on hazing violations.

5.2.3 Example Incident & Response

Texas A&M has faced several high-profile hazing incidents, some of which have resulted in serious lawsuits:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit (around 2021): This case involved allegations from two pledges who claimed they were covered in “toxic substances” including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit during a fall 2020 hazing event. The chemical exposure allegedly caused severe chemical burns requiring emergency skin graft surgeries. The local SAE chapter was suspended by the university for two years, and the pledges subsequently filed a $1 million lawsuit against the fraternity and individuals involved, highlighting the potential for extreme physical harm.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging degrading hazing that included being coerced into simulated sexual acts and being bound in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. This individual sought over $1 million in damages, with the case spotlighting the severe psychological and physical toll of hazing within the Corps. While the university stated it handled the matter according to its regulations, the lawsuit brought significant public attention to hazing practices within this highly traditional institution.

These cases demonstrate that hazing at Texas A&M can manifest in both Greek life and deeply rooted Corps traditions, and the university’s response and accountability are often scrutinized intently.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents at Texas A&M can involve investigations by the TAMU Police Department or the College Station Police Department (for off-campus hazing). Civil lawsuits concerning hazing at Texas A&M would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Brazos County (where College Station is located). Potential defendants include the individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially the university and property owners. Given the close ties many Tom Green County families have to Texas A&M, navigating these legal avenues can be particularly sensitive and require an experienced legal team.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For Tom Green County Aggies and their parents:

• Research the hazing history of any Greek organizations or Corps outfits your child might join, using A&M’s annual hazing reports.
• Understand the specific risks associated with both Greek life and Corps traditions, for which A&M has faced legal scrutiny.
• Document any strange behavior or injuries, ensuring medical records reflect the true cause of harm if hazing is involved.
• Report concerns immediately to the Dean of Students or TAMU Police, utilizing resources like the anonymous hazing hotline.
• Seek legal counsel from Attorney911 (1-888-ATTY-911) if hazing is suspected, especially given the history of physical and chemical hazing cases at A&M, and the firm’s experience with severe injury litigation.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin, one of the largest and most influential public universities in the state, attracts a significant number of students from across Texas, including many from Tom Green County. Its vibrant Greek life, numerous spirit organizations, and unique traditions make it a dynamic, yet sometimes risky, environment. Crucially, UT Austin stands out for its relatively high transparency regarding hazing violations, publishing an extensive online log that provides valuable insights for students, parents, and legal professionals.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin boasts a sprawling campus community with diverse student groups, ranging from a large Interfraternity Council (IFC) and Panhellenic Council, to cultural Greek organizations, and prominent spirit groups like the Texas Cowboys and Texas Wranglers. This rich tapestry of organizations, often steeped in tradition, creates an environment where the line between “bonding” and illegal hazing can often be blurred.

5.3.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

The University of Texas at Austin has a clear zero-tolerance policy for hazing, applicable to all student organizations both on and off campus. Their policy broadly defines hazing to include any act that endangers a student’s mental or physical health or safety. UT emphasizes that “consent to hazing activity is not a defense.” The university facilitates reporting through the Office of Student Conduct, the Dean of Students, the UT Police Department (UTPD), and an “incident reporting” system. Most notably, UT maintains a publicly accessible Hazing Violations webpage that lists organizations, dates of incidents, a description of the conduct, and the disciplinary sanctions imposed. This transparency is exceptional and a critical resource.

5.3.3 Example Incident & Response

UT Austin’s public hazing log reveals a consistent pattern of violations across various organizations. For example:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) (2023): This chapter was cited for hazing where new members were directed to consume large quantities of milk and perform strenuous calisthenics. The university found this constituted hazing, placing the chapter on probation and mandating new hazing-prevention education.
• Texas Wranglers (Spirit Group): This well-known spirit organization has faced multiple sanctions for hazing violations involving forced physical activity, alcohol hazing, and other forms of psychological manipulation.
• Other groups, including fraternities and various spirit organizations, have been sanctioned for misconduct ranging from forced workouts and alcohol-related activities to punishment-based practices designed to instill fear or subservience.

While UT’s transparency is commendable, the repeated violations demonstrate persistent challenges. The public log is invaluable for helping Tom Green County families make informed decisions about their student’s involvement and can provide crucial background for any potential legal action.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents at UT Austin are typically investigated by the UT Police Department (UTPD) for on-campus occurrences, or the Austin Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would generally be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Travis County (where Austin is located). Given UT’s public status, civil claims against the university itself might involve navigating sovereign immunity laws, though exceptions exist for gross negligence or Title IX violations. Cases often proceed against individuals, the local chapter, and the national fraternity. The existence of UT’s public hazing log can be a significant asset in civil suits, providing documented evidence of an organization’s prior behavior and the university’s prior knowledge or responses.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

For Tom Green County Longhorns and their parents:

• Regularly review UT’s Hazing Violations webpage before your child joins any organization to understand their history.
• Empower your child to speak up about any suspicious or uncomfortable “new member” activities.
• Document everything if hazing is suspected, including referencing specific incidents from UT’s public log if they align with the current situation.
• Contact Attorney911 for a confidential consultation (1-888-ATTY-911) if hazing occurs. We can leverage UT’s robust public records and our experience in Austin-based hazing cases to build a strong claim.
• Know that many hazing complaints listed on UT’s public log show that hazing is an ongoing problem that warrants vigilance.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, a distinguished private university in Dallas, is known for its strong academic programs and a prominent Greek life that is central to its social scene. For Tom Green County families considering SMU, understanding the dynamics of a private institution’s response to hazing, which can often be less transparent than public universities, is paramount.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU’s campus culture is shaped by its private university status, which often means a close-knit community with significant alumni engagement and a vibrant social scene centered around its Greek fraternities and sororities. The pressure to join specific organizations can be intense, creating a fertile ground for hazing when left unchecked. Dallas County’s affluent communities, including University Park and Highland Park surrounding SMU, add a unique dimension to the social landscape, shaping perceptions of Greek life.

5.4.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

SMU maintains clear anti-hazing policies, prohibiting any act of hazing for student organizations. Their policy closely aligns with Texas state law, defining hazing as any act that endangers mental or physical health or safety for initiation or affiliation purposes. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students office, Student Conduct & Community Standards, and the SMU Police Department. SMU also promotes anonymous reporting systems, such as “Real Response,” to encourage students to come forward. As a private institution, SMU’s internal disciplinary records and information regarding hazing violations are not typically as public as those from state universities like UT Austin, which can make independent research more challenging for Tom Green County families.

5.4.3 Example Incident & Response

SMU has had its share of hazing incidents, typically resulting in suspensions for the offending fraternities. An example includes:

• Kappa Alpha Order (KA) (2017): This fraternity chapter faced allegations of severe hazing, including new members being paddled, forced to consume excessive alcohol, and subjected to sleep deprivation. The chapter was suspended by the university for several years, with restrictions placed on its ability to recruit new members until around 2021. This incident, while handled internally as is common for private institutions, underscore the persistent challenges within the Greek system.

These incidents highlight that despite policies and reporting systems, hazing remains a concern at SMU, and the university’s official responses can often be less visible to the public.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents at SMU are generally investigated by the SMU Police Department for on-campus matters, or the Dallas Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would be filed in the Dallas County District Courts. Because SMU is a private university, it does not have sovereign immunity protections like public universities, which can sometimes simplify the legal pathways for plaintiffs. However, private institutions often vigorously defend against such claims and may have robust legal teams. Obtaining internal disciplinary records from a private university often requires formal discovery processes in a lawsuit, compelling the institution to produce information that might not be publicly available.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For Tom Green County students attending SMU and their parents:

• Be vigilant about “new member” activities, particularly since SMU’s hazing records are not as transparent as public universities.
• Utilize SMU’s anonymous reporting systems like “Real Response” if hazing is suspected, and follow up with direct reports to the Dean of Students.
• Document every communication related to allegations, including the university’s response.
• Consult a lawyer experienced in hazing cases like Attorney911 (1-888-ATTY-911), who can navigate the unique challenges of litigation against private institutions and leverage discovery tools to uncover relevant information.
• Understand that even if hazing records are not public, a skilled attorney can often compel their disclosure in the course of a lawsuit.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Baptist university in Waco, holds a unique place among Texas institutions. Its spiritual mission and focus on faith-based education present a distinct backdrop against which hazing occurs. While it emphasizes community and ethical conduct, Baylor has faced significant scrutiny over institutional oversight, particularly concerning its handling of Title IX issues and athletic scandals, which inevitably color its response to other forms of campus misconduct like hazing. Students from Tom Green County often choose Baylor for its strong academic programs and values-centered approach.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor’s campus culture is strongly influenced by its Christian identity, with an emphasis on community values and student well-being. However, like many universities, it has an active Greek life and athletic programs that can become breeding grounds for hazing. The university’s past controversies regarding institutional oversight and student safety have placed a heightened focus on ensuring a safe environment, yet challenges persist.

5.5.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

Baylor University maintains a comprehensive anti-hazing policy that is consistent with Texas state law, broadly defining prohibited acts that endanger student welfare for initiation or affiliation purposes. Baylor’s policy explicitly states that implied or expressed consent is not a defense to hazing. Reporting channels include the Dean of Students’ office, the Department of Student Activities, the Baylor Police Department (BUPD), and an ethics point hotline for anonymous concerns. Baylor also publishes an online report of hazing incidents and disciplinary actions, providing valuable transparency for Tom Green County families.

5.5.3 Example Incident & Response

Baylor has encountered hazing incidents, demonstrating that even with a values-based mission, organizations can still engage in harmful practices:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): This high-profile incident involved the suspension of 14 players from the baseball team following a hazing investigation. The suspensions, staggered over the early season, brought significant attention to hazing within athletic programs at Baylor. This incident underscored the challenges universities face in curtailing hazing within competitive sports, even with strong policies in place. The incident occurred against a backdrop of Baylor’s broader cultural and oversight challenges, particularly in its athletic department previous years.

These recurring incidents demonstrate the importance of ongoing vigilance and strong enforcement, both for the university and for affected families from Tom Green County.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

Hazing incidents at Baylor University are investigated by the Baylor Police Department (BUPD) for on-campus matters, or the Waco Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would proceed in the McLennan County District Courts (where Waco is located). As a private university, Baylor does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it more directly amenable to lawsuits than public institutions. However, its strong legal resources mean that hazing cases are often vigorously defended. An attorney pursuing a case against Baylor would meticulously examine the university’s internal policies, its history of responding to prior hazing and student safety issues, and common law principles regarding negligence and duty of care.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

For Tom Green County students at Baylor and their parents:

• Review Baylor’s anti-hazing policies and the publicly available hazing incident reports to understand the risks.
• Encourage candid conversations with your child about the reality of “new member” activities in any organization they join.
• Document any and all suspicious activity or injuries, and utilize Baylor’s official reporting channels, including the ethics point hotline for anonymous reports.
• Seek legal guidance from Attorney911 (1-888-ATTY-911) if hazing harms your child. Our firm has experience with cases involving institutional oversight and can effectively pursue claims against private universities and their associated organizations.
• Be aware that Baylor’s history of scrutiny means they are particularly sensitive to campus safety issues, which can sometimes influence the severity of their internal responses to hazing.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

The patterns of hazing seen across UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor are often deeply connected to the histories and practices of national fraternities and sororities. Many of the organizations present on these Texas campuses are part of larger, national entities. This means a chapter in Houston might engage in similar hazing rituals that led to a death at another chapter across the country. For Tom Green County families, understanding these national histories is key to recognizing patterns of behavior and building stronger cases for accountability.

Why National Histories Matter

National fraternities and sororities typically have extensive anti-hazing policies and risk management guidelines. These policies are not theoretical; they exist because these organizations have experienced deaths, catastrophic injuries, and multi-million-dollar lawsuits across their chapters nationwide. They are acutely aware of the dangerous patterns: forced drinking nights, paddling traditions, humiliating rituals, and the pervasive culture of secrecy.

When a Texas chapter—whether it’s at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor—repeats the same hazing script that has been implicated in prior incidents at other chapters, it demonstrates a crucial legal concept: foreseeability. It suggests that the national organization knew, or should have known, the dangers associated with those particular activities. This prior knowledge can significantly bolster arguments of negligence or even support claims for punitive damages against national entities.

Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

Many of the fraternities and sororities found at major Texas universities have national counterparts with documented histories of hazing. Here’s how some major organizations with chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor tie into national patterns:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, Baylor. Nationally, Pike has been at the center of numerous hazing tragedies. The Stone Foltz case at Bowling Green State University in 2021, where a pledge died from alcohol poisoning after forced drinking, resulted in multiple criminal convictions and a multi-million-dollar settlement. The David Bogenberger case at Northern Illinois University in 2012, another alcohol-related death, also resulted in a $14 million settlement. These incidents reflect a disturbing national pattern of alcohol-fueled “Big/Little” or pledge events within Pike.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU. SAE has a widely documented national history of alcohol-related hazing deaths and severe injuries, leading to their unprecedented 2014 announcement to ban traditional pledging nationwide. Despite this, incidents persist. Examples include a lawsuit filed in 2023 at the University of Alabama alleging a pledge suffered a traumatic brain injury during hazing, and cases right here in Texas like the 2021 Texas A&M incident where pledges allegedly suffered severe chemical burns from industrial cleaner and other substances. In 2024, a lawsuit was filed against the UT Austin chapter alleging a physical assault against an exchange student.
• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor. The most prominent national incident is the 2017 death of Max Gruver at LSU from alcohol poisoning during a “Bible study” hazing ritual. This case directly led to Louisiana’s felony hazing statute, the Max Gruver Act. This demonstrates that patterned hazing, even if disguised as a “game,” can quickly turn fatal.
• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Present at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin. Nationally, Pi Kappa Phi is known for the 2017 death of Andrew Coffey at Florida State University, an alcohol-related hazing during a “Big Brother Night.” This fatality led to criminal prosecutions and a temporary ban on Greek life at FSU.
• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor. This fraternity is tragically linked to the highly publicized 2017 death of Timothy Piazza at Penn State, where a pledge died after severe alcohol consumption and delayed medical treatment. The extensive media coverage and legal fallout from this incident highlighted institutional cover-ups and spurred national anti-hazing legislation.
• Kappa Alpha Order (KA): Chapters are at Texas A&M and SMU. Nationally, this fraternity has faced numerous hazing allegations and suspensions at various universities, including the 2017 SMU incident where new members were reportedly paddled and forced to consume alcohol.
• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI): Present at Texas A&M. This fraternity is tragically linked to the 2021 incident at the University of Missouri where pledge Danny Santulli suffered severe, permanent brain damage from forced alcohol consumption. The case generated extensive national attention and multi-million-dollar confidential settlements.
• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): Active at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor. Nationally, Sigma Chi was involved in a 2024 case at the College of Charleston where a pledge alleged physical beatings and forced substance consumption, leading to a settlement of more than $10 million. This indicates that juries and settlements are increasingly recognizing the severe damages caused by hazing.
• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, Baylor. Nationally, Kappa Sigma is associated with the 2001 death of Chad Meredith at the University of Miami, who drowned after being persuaded by fraternity members to swim while intoxicated. A jury awarded his parents a $12.6 million verdict, and a law was named in his honor in Florida, criminalizing hazing. Most recently, the Texas A&M chapter has been embroiled in ongoing litigation regarding allegations of hazing that caused severe rhabdomyolysis in 2023.

These examples underscore that pattern evidence is powerful. When an organization’s chapters across the country consistently engage in specific types of dangerous behaviors, it becomes harder for the national body to claim ignorance.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

This extensive national and campus-specific hazing history is not just for public awareness; it is central to legal strategy.

• Foreseeability and Prior Knowledge: When an organization has a documented history of alcohol abuse, physical abuse, or psychological manipulation within its chapters, it becomes extremely difficult for them to argue that a similar incident was unforeseeable or that they had no prior knowledge of the risks. This strengthens negligence arguments.
• Policy Versus Practice: Many national organizations can point to thick anti-hazing manuals. However, a pattern of repeated incidents across campuses can be used to demonstrate that these policies were mere “paper policies” – not meaningfully enforced, or that prior violations were met with insufficient punishment, thereby failing to deter future misconduct.
• Insurance Coverage Disputes: Insurers often try to deny coverage for hazing, claiming it’s an “intentional act” exclusion. However, a history of similar incidents can help establish that the damages resulted from the national organization’s negligent supervision or failure to enforce policies – a negligent act that might be covered. This can significantly impact settlement leverage and potential for punitive damages.

For families in Tom Green County facing hazing, understanding these organizational patterns and national histories provides crucial context and can significantly impact the strength and success of their legal claims.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

For families in Tom Green County coping with the aftermath of hazing, pursuing justice requires a meticulous, strategic approach. Building a strong hazing case against individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and even universities involves gathering compelling evidence, understanding the full scope of compensable damages, and employing sophisticated legal strategies.

Evidence

Modern litigation, especially involving hazing, is heavily reliant on digital evidence. Our attorneys understand what evidence matters most:

• Digital Communications: This is often the most critical evidence. GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, and other fraternity/sorority apps are used for planning hazing, giving instructions, and documenting events. These messages expose planning, intent, specific roles of individuals, and subsequent cover-up attempts. While messages may be deleted, digital forensics can often recover them. Screenshots, if captured promptly, are invaluable. Our firm also strongly advises making a recording or video from your cell phone to document such events, as explained in Attorney911’s video on using your phone to document evidence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs).
• Photos & Videos: Beyond screenshots, actual photos and videos of hazing events (whether from members’ phones, social media posts, or campus security cameras) are powerful. This includes images showing injuries, humiliating acts, forced drinking, or dangerous stunts. Location tags and timestamps further bolster credibility.
• Internal Organization Documents: Pledge manuals, initiation scripts, “tradition” lists, and emails from officers detailing “new member education” can confirm an organization’s awareness or intent. National policies and training materials can highlight the gap between stated rules and actual practice.
• University Records: Prior disciplinary files, probation records, or warning letters issued to the organization involved are critical. Incident reports (from campus police or student conduct offices), and public disclosures such as Clery Reports or hazing logs (like UT Austin’s) can show a pattern of negligence or a university’s inadequate response.
• Medical and Psychological Records: Comprehensive documentation from emergency rooms, hospitals, and follow-up care is vital. This includes toxicology reports, imaging results (X-rays, CT scans, MRIs), and all records related to surgeries, rehabilitation, and long-term care. Psychological evaluations (documenting PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidal ideation) are essential for proving non-economic damages.
• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts from other pledges, current or former members, roommates, Resident Assistants (RAs), coaches, or bystanders provide crucial perspective and corroboration. Identifying and securing testimony from credible witnesses is paramount.

Damages

The law recognizes that hazing inflicts a wide range of harms, both tangible and intangible. Victims and their families can potentially recover several categories of damages:

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This covers all costs associated with physical injuries, from emergency room visits and ambulance transport to lengthy hospital stays, surgeries, ongoing physical therapy, rehabilitation, and prescribed medications. For catastrophic injuries, a “life care plan” detailing future medical and personal care needs can be a major component of damages.
• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: This includes compensation for lost wages (if a student had to take time off work or a parent missed work to care for them), and the profound impact on a student’s education. This could mean lost scholarships, missed semesters, delayed graduation, and a diminished future earning capacity if injuries lead to permanent disability or mental health challenges that hinder career prospects.
• Non-Economic Damages: These subjective but legally compensable damages address the immeasurable suffering, including physical pain, emotional distress, intense trauma, humiliation, profound loss of dignity, and the inability to enjoy life as before. These damages are often difficult to quantify but recognized by juries tasked with compensating for suffering.
• Wrongful Death Damages: 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, and perhaps most importantly, the profound loss of companionship, love, guidance, and the immense grief and suffering endured by the family.

It’s important to remember that describing these categories does not promise specific dollar amounts. Every case is evaluated individually, based on the severity of harm and the specifics of relevant laws.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

Part of our strategy involves meticulously identifying all potentially liable parties and their corresponding insurance coverage.

• National fraternities, universities, and individual students typically carry various forms of insurance policies (general liability, directors and officers, homeowner’s, umbrella policies) that may be triggered in a hazing lawsuit.
• However, insurers often attempt to deny coverage by arguing that hazing, as an “intentional act,” falls under policy exclusions.
• Our experienced hazing lawyers understand how to navigate these complex disputes, often by demonstrating that the damages resulted from negligent supervision, failure to enforce policies, or a pattern of foreseeable misconduct—actions that are typically covered. This expertise is crucial for maximizing recovery for Tom Green County families. Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) is particularly valuable here, providing insider knowledge on how large insurance companies value claims, negotiate, and defend against them.

Practical Guides & FAQs

For families in Tom Green County, navigating a hazing incident can feel overwhelming. We’ve compiled practical advice for parents, students, and witnesses, as well as answers to common questions.

For Parents

No parent wants to imagine their child in danger at college, but being prepared can make all the difference.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be aware of unexplained injuries or “repeated accidents” (especially if the stories don’t add up); sudden exhaustion or severe sleep deprivation; drastic changes in mood, increased anxiety, or social withdrawal; constant secret phone use (often for group chats) and an intense fear of missing “mandatory” events that interfere with academics or sleep.
• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not judgment. Ask open-ended questions like, “How are things really going with the fraternity?” or “Is there anything about the new member process that makes you uncomfortable?” Emphasize that their safety and well-being are your top priority, and you will support them regardless of their choices about the group.
• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize medical care immediately. Document everything: take photos of injuries, screenshot any relevant texts or messages, and meticulously record what your child tells you (dates, times, names).
• Dealing with the University: Document all communications with university administrators. Ask specific questions about any prior incidents involving the same organization and what the university did in response. This information is crucial for establishing a pattern of negligence.
• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child sustains significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing or actively hiding what happened, it’s time to consult with an experienced hazing lawyer like Attorney911.

For Students / Pledges

You have rights, and you are not alone.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? If you feel unsafe, humiliated, or coerced; if you’re forced to consume alcohol, endure pain, or perform degrading acts; if the activity is kept secret from the public or administrators – it is most likely hazing. Tradition should never involve harm or degradation.
• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: The pressure to “belong” or “earn your letters” can make you feel like you’ve consented. However, the law often views “consent” under duress or extreme peer pressure as coerced, not voluntary. This is why Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing.
• Exiting and Reporting Safely: You have the legal right to leave any organization at any time. If you feel unsafe, remove yourself from the situation and reach out to a trusted adult. Many universities and Texas law offer good-faith reporting protections and amnesty for students who seek medical help in emergencies, even if alcohol or drugs were involved. Anonymous reporting hotlines are also available.
• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Be aware that Texas law and most university policies encourage calling for help in an emergency by offering protections or leniency to those who seek aid, even if they were also involved in the incident. Your safety, and the safety of others, comes first.

For Former Members / Witnesses

Your conscience matters and your actions can prevent future harm.

• Acknowledge Your Role: It’s common to feel guilt or fear if you’ve participated in or witnessed hazing. However, your testimony and any evidence you possess could be pivotal in preventing future harm and potentially saving lives.
• Your Impact: Speaking out, even anonymously, can force accountability on organizations that have caused harm.
• Legal Advice: If you have concerns about your own legal exposure, please seek confidential legal advice. Lawyers can help you understand your options and navigate your role as a witness or even a potential co-defendant.

Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

Protecting your child and your legal rights means avoiding common, yet critical, mistakes. As Attorney911, we often see families inadvertently sabotage their own cases. Watch Attorney911’s video on client mistakes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY) for more details.

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

   • What parents think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This looks like a massive cover-up, can be considered obstruction of justice, and makes prosecuting a case nearly impossible.
   • What to do instead: Preserve everything immediately, even embarrassing or supposedly incriminating content.

2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly:

   • What parents think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind.”
   • Why it’s wrong: They will immediately lawyer up, destroy evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defenses. You lose the element of surprise and critical evidence.
   • What to do instead: Document everything, then call a lawyer before any confrontation.

3. Signing University “Release” or “Resolution” Forms:

   • What universities do: Pressure families to sign waivers or “internal resolution” agreements.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your right to pursue a civil lawsuit, and any “settlement” offered is almost always far below the actual value of your case.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university without an attorney reviewing it first.

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

   • What families think: “I want people to know what happened.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Defense attorneys screenshot everything. Inconsistencies between early social media posts and later testimony can hurt credibility. It can also inadvertently waive legal privilege.
   • What to do instead: Document privately; let your lawyer control public messaging strategically.

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

   • What fraternities say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic.”
   • Why it’s wrong: They will pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can later be used against your child or your case.
   • What to do instead: Once you’re considering legal action, all communication should go through your lawyer.

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

   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating; let us handle this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Evidence disappears, witnesses graduate, the statute of limitations runs, and the university controls the narrative. Their internal process often prioritizes institutional protection over your child’s full recovery.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW; consult a lawyer immediately. University processes are separate from true legal accountability.

7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer:

   • What adjusters say: “We just need your statement to process the claim normally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Recorded statements are used against you. Early settlement offers are typically significant lowballs.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline and say, “My attorney will contact you.”

Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?” Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin) have some sovereign immunity protections, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, Title IX violations, and when suing individuals in their personal capacity outside of their official duties. Private universities (like SMU, Baylor) have fewer immunity protections. Every case depends on its specific facts—contact Attorney911 (1-888-ATTY-911) for case-specific analysis.
• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?” It can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default, but it becomes a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who are members or officers can also face misdemeanor charges for failing to report hazing. Texas’s robust criminal defense laws mean that individuals face real consequences.
• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?” Yes. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to prosecution for hazing. Courts and juries recognize that “consent” under intense peer pressure, power imbalance, and fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent.
• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?” Generally, the statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death cases in Texas is two years from the date of injury or death. 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 disappears, witnesses graduate, and organizations destroy records. For more information, watch Attorney911’s video on statute of limitations (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c). Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately.
• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?” The location of hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship, control, knowledge, and the foreseeability of the hazing. Many major hazing cases, including the Pi Delta Psi retreat case and the Sigma Pi unofficial house death, occurred off-campus and still resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments.
• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?” Most hazing cases settle confidentially before trial. You can request sealed court records and confidential settlement terms to protect your family’s privacy. We prioritize your family’s privacy while vigorously pursuing accountability.

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. This is where Attorney911, The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, distinguishes itself as the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

From our Houston office, we serve families throughout Texas, including Tom Green County and the surrounding communities of San Angelo, Mertzon, Eldorado, and Ozona. We understand that hazing at Texas universities can deeply impact families in Tom Green County and across the entire State. Our firm brings a unique blend of experience and strategic insight to hazing litigation.

Our unique qualifications are especially suited for the complex world of hazing accountability:

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, brings invaluable experience as a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm. She understands precisely how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims, their delay tactics, coverage exclusion arguments, and settlement strategies. As she often says, “We know their playbook because we used to run it,” giving our clients a critical edge in negotiations.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Ralph P. Manginello, our managing partner, has extensive federal court experience (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) and was notably involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation—a testament to our ability to take on billion-dollar corporations and win. We are not intimidated by national fraternities, powerful universities, or their well-funded defense teams. We know how to fight powerful defendants and secure significant results.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: We have a proven track record in complex wrongful death cases, collaborating with economists to meticulously value loss of life and future financial impact. We possess deep experience in cases involving catastrophic injuries like brain damage and permanent disability, understanding the long-term needs for life care plans. We don’t settle cheap; we diligently build cases that demand full accountability for the devastating losses a family can face.
• Criminal + Civil Hazing 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 and former members with potential criminal exposure while simultaneously pursuing civil justice for victims.
• Investigative Depth: We leverage a vast network of experts—medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists—to build comprehensive cases. Our experience in complex investigations, akin to uncovering institutional knowledge and prior incidents in refinery accidents, means we know how to obtain hidden evidence like deleted group chats, chapter records, and university disciplinary files through discovery. 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. We know how to uncover modern hazing, from subpoenaing national fraternity records that show patterns of prior incidents to securing university files through discovery and public records requests.

Most importantly, we approach every case with empathy and victim advocacy at our core. We know this is one of the hardest things a family can face. Our job is to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We are not about bravado or quick settlements; we are dedicated to thorough investigation, genuine accountability, and justice.

Contact Attorney911 Today

If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus—whether it was Angelo State University closer to home in San Angelo, or a larger institution like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor—we want to hear from you. Families in Tom Green County and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers and accountability.

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

In your free consultation, you can expect us to:

• Listen to your story without judgment, respecting your experience.
• Review any evidence you have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• Clearly explain your legal options, whether that includes a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• Discuss realistic timelines and what you can expect during the legal process.
• Answer your questions about costs and fees, explaining our contingency fee model (we don’t get paid unless we win your case). Watch our video explaining contingency fees: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc.
• Provide you with time to make an informed decision without pressure to hire us on the spot.
• Assure you that everything you tell us is confidential.

Call us today:

• Toll-Free: 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 consultation in Spanish. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

Whether you’re in Tom Green County—from San Angelo to Grape Creek, Wall to Carlsbad—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