Kimble County residents facing fraternity or sorority hazing injuries, wrongful death, or civil litigation can rely on Attorney911 — Legal Emergency Lawyers™. Our former insurance defense attorney understands fraternity insurance tactics. We have federal court experience taking on national fraternities and universities, proven by our BP explosion litigation. With HCCLA criminal defense and civil wrongful death expertise, we secure multi-million dollar results for cases at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor. We are evidence preservation specialists with 25+ years experience. Hablamos Español. Free consultation. Contingency fee: no win, no fee. Call 1-888-ATTY-911.

Surviving Hazing: A Definitive Guide for Families in Kimble County and Across Texas

The call comes late, a whispered panic, or perhaps the hospital is on the line. Your child, far from the familiar comforts of Kimble County, is suddenly in a dangerous situation at a Texas university, tangled in the dangerous web of hazing. One student, an eager freshman, is pressured during “initiation night” at an off-campus fraternity house. The air is thick with anticipation and the smell of cheap liquor. Other members film on their phones, chanting, urging him to drink far beyond safe limits. He feels the room spin, his vision blurs, but the pressure to belong, to prove himself, makes him choke down more. Someone laughs, someone points a phone, and then he collapses. Peers hesitate, fearful of “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble” themselves, delaying what could be life-saving medical attention. Your child feels trapped between a desperate desire for loyalty to the group and the primal instinct for survival.

This scenario, tragically common, could unfold at any Texas university—whether near your home in Kimble County or hundreds of miles away in Austin, College Station, Houston, Dallas, or Waco. Hazing isn’t a relic of the past; it’s a modern crisis, evolving in its cruelty and cunning, leaving a trail of shattered lives and grieving families.

At The Manginello Law Firm, operating as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, we understand the profound fear and confusion that grips families in Kimble County and across Texas when hazing strikes. This comprehensive guide is written for you—parents, students, and concerned community members in Kimble County and beyond—to unravel the complexities of hazing in 2025. Here, we will explore what hazing truly looks like today, navigate the labyrinth of Texas and federal law, examine pivotal national and state-specific cases, and outline the legal options available to victims and their families.

This article provides general information and is not specific legal advice. Our firm is dedicated to evaluating individual cases based on their unique facts. We serve families throughout Texas, including those right here in Kimble County, offering a lifeline in times of campus crisis.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

• If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

• In the first 48 hours:

  • Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.” Prioritize their health and safety above all else.
  • Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
    • Screenshot group chats, texts, and direct messages (DMs) immediately. Digital evidence is often the strongest key to accountability.
    • Photograph any injuries from multiple angles, ensuring timestamps are visible.
    • Save physical items such as clothing worn during the incident, receipts for forced purchases, or any objects used in the hazing.
  • Write down everything while memory is fresh: who was involved, what happened, when and where it occurred. Detailed, contemporaneous notes are crucial.
  • Do NOT:
    • Confront the fraternity, sorority, or organization directly.
    • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without legal advice.
    • Post details on public social media. Such posts can be used by opposing counsel and may compromise your case.
    • Let your child delete messages or attempt to “clean up” evidence.

• Contact an experienced hazing attorney within 24–48 hours:

  • Evidence disappears fast—group chats are deleted, physical objects removed, and witnesses coached.
  • Universities often move quickly to control the narrative, which may not align with your child’s best interests.
  • We can help preserve critical evidence and protect your child’s rights from the outset.
  • Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for immediate, confidential consultation.

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

The image of hazing often conjures up antiquated notions of mere pranks or harmless initiations. However, modern hazing, as seen by families in Kimble County and across Texas, is far more insidious, dangerous, and often digitally enforced than ever before. It’s a spectrum of abuse designed to assert power, enforce loyalty through fear, and demand obedience.

Hazing is defined as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, whether on or off campus, directed against a student for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students, that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of that student. This encompasses a broad range of behaviors, from forced consumption of dangerous substances to psychological manipulation and extreme physical endurance tests. The common defense of “I agreed to it” holds little legal weight when there is clear evidence of peer pressure, power imbalance, and a climate of coercion.

Main Categories of Hazing: Beyond the Stereotypes

Modern hazing tactics have adapted and evolved, making them harder to detect but no less damaging. For Kimble County families, understanding these categories is the first step toward recognition and prevention:

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains the single most common and deadly form of hazing. It includes forced or coerced drinking, often through brutal “games” like chugging challenges or “lineups” that require rapid consumption. Pledges can be pressured to consume unknown substances or dangerous mixes, leading to severe alcohol poisoning or overdose. The tragic deaths of Stone Foltz, Andrew Coffey, and Max Gruver all stemmed from this type of hazing, illustrating its devastating consequences.

• Physical Hazing: Beyond the traditional paddling and beatings, physical hazing includes extreme calisthenics, forced “workouts” or “smokings” that push individuals far beyond safe physical limits, often leading to rhabdomyolysis—a severe muscle breakdown. Sleep deprivation, food or water deprivation, and exposure to extreme environmental conditions (cold or heat) are also common. Historically, cases such as Michael Deng’s fatal “glass ceiling” ritual demonstrated the violent potential of this category. In a 2023 Texas A&M case, chemical burns from industrial-strength cleaner poured on pledges highlighted the evolving dangers.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: This explicitly degrading form of hazing includes forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (e.g., “roasted pig” positions), wearing humiliating costumes, or engaging in acts with racist, homophobic, or sexist overtones. These acts are designed to break down an individual’s self-esteem and instill absolute subservience, leaving deep psychological scars.

• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but profoundly damaging, psychological hazing involves verbal abuse, threats, forced isolation from friends and family, and constant manipulation. It includes public shaming, ostracization on social media, or forced confessions designed to emotionally control and dominate new members. This tier of hazing often sets the stage for more severe abuse by eroding a victim’s confidence and ability to resist.

• Digital/Online Hazing: With the rise of smartphones and social media, hazing has found a new, insidious frontier. This includes constant monitoring of group chats (GroupMe, WhatsApp, Discord), late-night demands for responses, public humiliation via Instagram, Snapchat, or TikTok, and pressure to create or share compromising images or videos. Geo-location tracking apps like Find My Friends or Life360 are sometimes demanded by organizations to maintain 24/7 control, eroding privacy and fostering a constant state of anxiety.

Where Hazing Actually Happens: A Pervasive Problem

Hazing is not confined to one type of organization or a specific campus demographic. While fraternities and sororities (including Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek organizations) are frequently implicated, hazing is a pervasive issue across a variety of student groups:

• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / military-style groups: With their emphasis on tradition, hierarchy, and physical endurance, these groups can sometimes foster environments where hazing flourishes under the guise of “training” or “bonding.”
• Spirit squads, tradition clubs, and university organizations: Prestigious groups like the Texas Cowboys at UT, or even spirit organizations like “Absolute Texxas” at UT, have faced disciplinary actions for hazing.
• Athletic teams: From football and basketball to baseball, cheer, and even swim teams, hazing has been documented across college, high school, and professional athletics. The recent scandal at Northwestern University involving widespread sexualized and racist hazing in its football program serves as a stark reminder.
• Marching bands and performance groups: Even seemingly innocuous organizations are not immune. The tragic death of Robert Champion from physical hazing in the Florida A&M University marching band highlighted this broader pattern.
• Service, cultural, and academic organizations: Any group with a selective membership process and a strong sense of tradition can be vulnerable to hazing.

The common threads running through all these incidents are social status, exclusivity, and a culture of secrecy. Despite widespread anti-hazing policies and legal prohibitions, these deeply entrenched traditions allow hazing to persist, often under the radar, until tragedy strikes. For families in Kimble County, understanding this broad landscape is crucial as their children explore extracurriculars at Texas universities.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Navigating the legal landscape of hazing can be overwhelming for families in Kimble County. It involves understanding not only Texas state statutes but also broader federal provisions that influence campus safety and accountability. We aim to provide a clear, practical explanation of the legal environment surrounding hazing in Texas.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has a specific, comprehensive set of anti-hazing provisions embedded in its Education Code, particularly Chapter 37, Subchapter F. These laws broadly define hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, performed by one person or a group, on or off campus, that is directed against a student and endangers the mental or physical health or safety of that student. This act must occur for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any student organization.

Key aspects of Texas hazing law:

• Broad Definition of Harm: Hazing is not limited to physical injury. It explicitly includes acts that endanger mental health or safety, recognizing the severe psychological toll of humiliation, intimidation, and emotional abuse.
• Location Irrelevant: The law applies whether the hazing occurs on campus, in an off-campus house, at a private retreat, or even online.
• No Consent Defense: Crucially, Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that it is not a defense to a hazing charge that the person being hazed consented to the activity. This acknowledges the inherent power dynamic and coercion victims often face.

Criminal Penalties for Hazing in Texas:

Texas law outlines significant penalties for hazing offenses:

• Class B Misdemeanor: Most hazing acts, those not causing serious injury, are classified as a Class B misdemeanor, carrying up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If hazing causes an injury requiring medical treatment, the charge can be elevated to a Class A misdemeanor.
• State Jail Felony: If hazing results in serious bodily injury or death, the offense becomes a state jail felony, which can carry more severe prison sentences and fines.
• Failure to Report: Individuals who are members or officers of organizations and who know about hazing but fail to report it can also face misdemeanor charges.
• Retaliation: Retaliating against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor.

Organizational Liability:
Under Texas Education Code § 37.153, organizations themselves (fraternities, sororities, clubs, teams) can be held criminally responsible for hazing if the organization authorized or encouraged the hazing, or if an officer or member acting in an official capacity knew about the hazing and failed to report it. Penalties can include fines up to $10,000, and universities can revoke the organization’s official recognition. This emphasizes that both individuals and the organizations they belong to are accountable.

Immunity for Good-Faith Reporting:
To encourage reporting, Texas Education Code § 37.154 provides immunity from civil or criminal liability for individuals who report hazing incidents in good faith. This protection, coupled with “good-faith reporter” amnesty policies at many universities, means students who call for help in an emergency (even if underage drinking was involved) generally will not face legal repercussions for making that call.

This is a summary of complex statutes. For a detailed understanding, your attorney will refer to the actual Texas Education Code.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases: Understanding the Differences for Kimble County Families

When hazing occurs, there are typically two distinct legal avenues that may be pursued: criminal cases and civil cases. While both seek justice, their aims, procedures, and potential outcomes differ significantly.

• Criminal Cases: These cases are initiated and prosecuted by the state (the District Attorney’s office) on behalf of the public. Their primary aim is to punish individuals or organizations for violating state laws. In hazing, typical criminal charges can include: direct hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, and even negligent homicide or manslaughter in fatal incidents. The burden of proof in criminal cases is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” a high standard. A criminal conviction can result in fines, probation, or jail time for those found guilty.

• Civil Cases: These cases are brought by victims or their surviving families against the individuals and entities they believe are responsible for the harm. The primary aim of a civil lawsuit is monetary compensation to cover the victim’s losses (medical bills, lost income, pain and suffering) and to hold negligent parties accountable. Civil cases related to hazing often involve claims of: negligence, gross negligence, wrongful death, negligent hiring or supervision, premises liability, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The burden of proof is “a preponderance of the evidence,” which is lower than in criminal cases. A civil case leads to a monetary judgment or settlement, not jail time.

It’s crucial for Kimble County families to understand that a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. Even if criminal charges are not filed or do not result in a conviction, a civil lawsuit can still proceed and succeed based on its own evidence and legal standards. Both types of cases can run side-by-side, each pursuing distinct objectives.

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

While hazing is largely addressed by state laws, several federal provisions also impact how hazing incidents are handled on college campuses and can provide additional avenues for accountability.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This significant piece of federal legislation requires colleges and universities that receive federal funding to increase transparency and prevention efforts related to hazing. By approximately 2026, institutions will be required to publicly report hazing incidents in a standardized manner, strengthen their hazing education and prevention programs, and maintain more accessible public data on hazing violations. This act is expected to drive greater accountability and provide families in Kimble County with more insight into the hazing records of the institutions their children attend.

• Title IX: This federal law prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based humiliation, or a hostile environment based on sex, Title IX obligations are triggered. This means universities have a legal duty to investigate and address such conduct, even if it happens off-campus, and a violation can lead to significant federal consequences for the institution.

• Clery Act: The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. While hazing is not always explicitly listed as a Clery crime, hazing incidents often overlap with categories that are reportable under Clery, such as alcohol offenses, drug offenses, assaults, or sex offenses. Universities that fail to comply with Clery Act reporting requirements can face substantial fines.

These federal laws create a broader framework of responsibility for universities, providing additional legal grounds to hold institutions accountable for failing to prevent or respond appropriately to hazing.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit: A Multi-Layered Approach

One of the complexities of hazing litigation for families in Kimble County is identifying all potentially liable parties. Hazing is rarely the act of a single individual; it’s often a systemic failure involving multiple layers of responsibility.

• Individual Students: The most direct perpetrators—those who planned the hazing, supplied dangerous substances, carried out physical abuse, or actively participated in the cover-up—can be held personally liable for their actions. This includes chapter officers, “pledge educators,” or any member directly involved.

• Local Chapters/Organizations: The fraternity, sorority, or student club itself, if it is a legal entity, can be sued. This is particularly true if the hazing was endorsed by chapter leadership, occurred during an official event, or involved practices that were historically part of the chapter’s “tradition.”

• National Fraternities/Sororities: These national headquarters often promulgate policies, receive dues, and exert a degree of supervision over their local chapters. Their liability can arise if they knew or reasonably should have known about a pattern of hazing within a chapter or across their organization, yet failed to adequately intervene, enforce their own anti-hazing policies, or provide proper oversight. Evidence of repeated hazing incidents within an organization across different campuses can be crucial in establishing national liability.

• Universities or Colleges: The educational institution itself can be held liable under various theories, including:

  • Negligence: For failing to adequately supervise student organizations, enforce anti-hazing policies, or respond to known hazing risks.
  • Gross Negligence: For demonstrating extreme disregard for student safety, often involving a pattern of willful blindness or deliberate indifference to known dangers.
  • Premises Liability: If hazing occurred on university property and the university failed to maintain a safe environment.
  • Title IX Violations: If the hazing involved sex discrimination or created a sexually hostile environment.
    Public universities (like UH, Texas A&M, and UT) may assert sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist, particularly for gross negligence, Title IX claims, or when suing individual university employees in their personal capacity. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections.

• Third Parties: Depending on the specific facts of the case, other entities may also bear responsibility:

  • Property Owners/Landlords: If the hazing occurred at a rented house or venue, and the owner knew or should have known about dangerous activities occurring there.
  • Alcohol Providers: Bars, stores, or individuals who illegally furnished alcohol to minors involved in hazing may face liability under dram shop laws or social host liability.
  • Security Companies: If hired to provide security for an event where hazing occurred, and they failed in their duty.

Every hazing case is unique, and the specific parties held liable will depend on a thorough investigation into the facts, institutional policies, and state and federal laws applicable to the situation. Our experienced legal team is adept at identifying all potential defendants to ensure comprehensive accountability for families throughout Kimble County and Texas.

National Hazing Case Patterns: Anchor Stories and Their Lessons for Texas Families

The tragic lessons learned from high-profile hazing cases across the United States have profoundly shaped anti-hazing legislation, university policies, and civil litigation. These “anchor stories” reveal recurring patterns of abuse, institutional failures, and the devastating consequences that resonate deeply with families in Kimble County, Texas. They underscore why the work of firms like Attorney911 is so vital in holding powerful institutions accountable.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death: A Repeating Tragedy

Forced alcohol consumption remains the most common and deadliest form of hazing. Case after case demonstrates a chilling consistency in how these incidents unfold, often involving ritualized drinking games, immense peer pressure, and a tragic delay in seeking medical help.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries and a ruptured spleen after a brutal “bid acceptance” night. He was forced to drink dangerous amounts of alcohol, fell repeatedly (captured on surveillance cameras), and lay injured for hours while fraternity brothers delayed calling 911 out of fear of repercussions. This tragedy led to dozens of criminal charges, civil litigation, and the landmark Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. For Texas families, this case highlights the critical importance of immediate medical intervention and how a culture of silence can turn foreseeable accidents into fatalities.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, a 20-year-old pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning (with a blood alcohol content of .447) during a “Big Brother Night” event. He was given a full handle of liquor and was severely intoxicated when left unconscious. Multiple members faced criminal hazing charges, and Texas families should recognize that this “tradition” of forced drinking is a formulaic script for disaster, regardless of the university or fraternity. Florida State temporarily suspended all Greek life and overhauled its hazing policies in response.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, 18, died after a “Bible study” drinking game where pledges were forced to consume high-percentage alcohol if they answered questions incorrectly. His blood alcohol content reached a fatal 0.495%. While criminal convictions were secured, the civil litigation led to a significant settlement, and Louisiana passed the Max Gruver Act, a felony hazing statute. This case demonstrated that legislative change and criminal consequences often follow public outrage and clear proof of hazing’s intentional cruelty.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, 20, died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” pledge night. This incident, just a few years ago, resulted in multiple criminal convictions for fraternity members. The Foltz family reached a $10 million settlement in 2023, with $7 million from Pi Kappa Alpha national and nearly $3 million from Bowling Green State University. This precedent is highly relevant to Texas families, illustrating that universities, even public ones, can face significant financial and reputational consequences for hazing, alongside the fraternities themselves.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing: The Deadly Deception of “Tradition”

Beyond alcohol, physical and ritualistic hazing can lead to severe injuries and death, often under the guise of “tradition” or “team building,” and frequently moved off-campus to evade detection.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died from a traumatic brain injury during a fraternity retreat in Pennsylvania. He was blindfolded, weighted with a backpack, and repeatedly tackled in a ritual called “glass ceiling.” Fraternity members waited hours before calling 911. This landmark case led to multiple criminal convictions, and the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, the first time a national Greek organization faced such a charge. The Pi Delta Psi fraternity was banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years and fined over $110,000. For families in Kimble County, this case underscores that off-campus “retreats” are often chosen precisely to conceal dangerous hazing, but they do not eliminate accountability for national organizations or individuals.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse: Beyond Greek Life

Hazing is unfortunately not exclusive to Greek letter fraternities and sororities. It plagues many student organizations, including high-profile athletic programs, where the stakes and the power dynamics can be even more pronounced.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): This case revealed a culture of widespread sexualized and racist hazing within Northwestern’s football program, going on for multiple years. Former players alleged shocking acts of abuse, leading to multiple lawsuits against the university and its coaching staff. Head coach Pat Fitzgerald was fired and later settled a wrongful-termination lawsuit confidentially. This scandal serves as a stark reminder for Texas families that hazing permeates all types of student organizations, including major athletic programs with immense power and financial backing, raising critical questions about institutional oversight.

What These National Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national anchor stories, while geographically distant, provide crucial lessons for families in Kimble County and throughout Texas. They consistently reveal:

• Foreseeable Risks: The common threads of forced drinking, physical abuse, humiliation, delayed medical care, and attempts at cover-ups demonstrate that these are not isolated incidents but foreseeable patterns of risk within the national Greek system and other student organizations.
• Legal Precedents: Multi-million-dollar settlements and significant criminal convictions set powerful legal precedents, strengthening the hand of victims and their families in Texas courts.
• Legislative Action: Tragedies often spur legislative change. Texas law itself has been bolstered in response to such incidents.
• Institutional Accountability: These cases demonstrate that universities and national organizations are not immune. They can be (and have been) held responsible when their negligence, willful blindness, or failure to enforce policies directly contributes to harm.

For Texas families grappling with hazing at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, these national lessons are vital. They illustrate that despite powerful opposition, accountability is possible through thorough investigation and determined legal action.

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

The landscape of higher education in Texas offers world-class institutions, but like universities nationwide, they are not immune to the challenges of hazing. For families in Kimble County, understanding the specific context at major Texas universities is key. Kimble County is geographically positioned in the heart of the Texas Hill Country, implying that many families from our area send their children to universities across the state, such as closer to home in Austin, or to the larger Houston and Bryan-College Station metros. While our primary office is in Houston, we extend our services across the entire state, recognizing that a hazing incident can impact any Texas family. We will focus particularly on the University of Texas at Austin as it is geographically relevant to Kimble County.

5.1 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

Families in Kimble County are no strangers to the allure of the University of Texas at Austin, one of the state’s most prestigious institutions, located just a few hours’ drive east. Many students from our region pursue higher education in Austin, making its campus culture and safety policies particularly relevant to Kimble County parents.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

The University of Texas at Austin is a sprawling public university known for its vibrant campus life, fiercely proud student body, and extensive Greek system. It’s home to nearly 60 fraternity and sorority chapters, encompassing Interfraternity Council (IFC), University Panhellenic Council (UPC), National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and various multicultural Greek organizations. Beyond Greek life, UT boasts hundreds of student organizations, spirit groups, and athletic teams, each contributing to a rich, often tradition-heavy, campus environment. This dense organizational ecosystem, combined with a strong sense of tradition, creates numerous potential pathways for hazing.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting

UT Austin maintains a robust anti-hazing policy, clearly stating the university’s zero-tolerance stance on hazing activities, whether on or off campus, and regardless of a student’s “consent.” This policy aligns with Texas Education Code § 37.151, prohibiting any intentional, knowing, or reckless act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for initiation or affiliation purposes. The university provides several reporting channels through the Office of the Dean of Students, the Student Conduct and Academic Integrity office, and the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD). Crucially, UT makes public its hazing violations and disciplinary actions on its website, offering a degree of transparency that is invaluable for families and legal teams alike.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

UT Austin’s public hazing log provides sobering evidence of ongoing challenges. While the university has a stated commitment to transparency and enforcement, recurring violations underscore the persistence of hazing.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): The UT chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) was disciplined after new members were reportedly forced to consume significant amounts of milk and perform strenuous calisthenics. This incident, deemed hazing, led to the chapter being placed on probation and mandated to implement new hazing-prevention education. This pattern reflects the national history of Pike, noted earlier with the Stone Foltz tragedy, highlighting a disturbing continuity of risky behavior within the organization’s chapters.
• Texas Wranglers (2022): This well-known spirit organization faced disciplinary action for hazing violations, including forced workouts, alcohol-related misconduct, and pressure tactics designed to physically and psychologically break down new members. Such incidents demonstrate that hazing is not confined to traditional Greek life at UT, extending to other highly selective student groups.
• Other Greek Chapters: UT’s public records show numerous other fraternities and sororities, across various councils, facing sanctions for alcohol misuse, sleep deprivation, verbal abuse, forced servitude, and other policy violations. The consistent appearance of certain organizations on this list indicates a potential pattern of non-compliance and a need for ongoing vigilance.

UT’s transparency, while commendable, also reveals the scope of the problem. It allows families in Kimble County and across Texas to see precisely which organizations have a history of misconduct. However, the presence of such a log also suggests that formal investigations are necessary to uncover detailed incidents.

5.1.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Kimble County families, pursuing a hazing case originating at UT Austin involves collaboration between various legal and law enforcement agencies.

• Law Enforcement Jurisdiction: Hazing incidents may involve the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) for on-campus or immediate off-campus areas, and/or the Austin Police Department (APD) for incidents within the city limits. Depending on the severity, the Travis County District Attorney’s Office would handle criminal prosecutions.
• Civil Litigation: Civil lawsuits would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Austin and Travis County. Potential defendants could include individual student perpetrators, the local chapter itself, the national fraternity/sorority organization, and potentially the University of Texas System.
• Importance of UT’s Public Log: A hazing claim at UT benefits significantly from the university’s public hazing violation log (hazing.utexas.edu). Any prior violations listed against a specific organization provide compelling evidence of foreseeability—showing that the university and the national organization knew or should have known about a pattern of risky behavior. This can be critical in establishing liability and even supporting claims for punitive damages.

5.1.5 What UT Austin Students & Parents Should Do

For students attending UT Austin and their families in Kimble County, specific actions can protect rights and contribute to accountability:

• Understand UT’s Policies: Familiarize yourselves with the comprehensive hazing policies and reporting procedures available on the UT Austin website.
• Utilize Public Records: Before joining, check UT’s public hazing violation log (hazing.utexas.edu) for any disciplinary history of the organization. This simple step can provide vital information.
• Report Directly: If hazing is suspected, utilize UT’s direct reporting channels through the Dean of Students office or UTPD. Documenting your report and any university response is crucial.
• Document Everything: As stressed in our “Immediate Help” section, any hint of hazing should trigger immediate and meticulous documentation—screenshots of digital communications, photos of injuries, and detailed notes.
• Seek Off-Campus Counsel: While utilizing university channels is important, consulting with a lawyer experienced in hazing cases in Austin and Travis County can help you navigate what can be a complex and often adversarial process. An attorney can help preserve evidence, protect your child’s rights from university pressure, and ensure all avenues for accountability (criminal and civil) are explored.

5.2 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a vibrant urban campus in the state’s largest city, is a hub for students from across Texas, including some who may have grown up in Kimble County before moving to Houston for their education. Its active Greek life and diverse student organizations present unique challenges and considerations for hazing prevention and response.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH is a large, diverse public university with a significant commuter population alongside its growing residential student body. Its Greek system is expansive, featuring Panhellenic, Interfraternity Council (IFC), Multicultural Greek Council (MGC), and National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) chapters. Beyond Greek life, UH boasts a wide array of student groups, ranging from academic societies to spirit organizations and athletic clubs. The blend of a large urban environment, diverse student body, and active student organizations means that hazing dynamics at UH can be multi-faceted, ranging from traditional fraternity hazing to issues arising in multicultural groups or sports teams.

5.2.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

The University of Houston prohibits all forms of hazing, whether on or off campus, and regardless of any perceived “consent.” Their policy explicitly forbids physical mistreatment, forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, and any acts that cause mental distress as part of initiation or affiliation. UH provides clear reporting channels through the Dean of Students Office, Student Conduct, and the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD). While UH publishes some disciplinary information, it is not as comprehensive or easily searchable as UT Austin’s dedicated hazing log, making external investigation more critical.

5.2.3 Example Incident & Response

While specific public records detailing hazing incidents at UH can be less transparent compared to UT’s detailed log, cases have emerged over the years that illustrate the ongoing challenges:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2016): An incident involving the UH chapter of Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) garnered significant attention. Pledges allegedly suffered from sleep and food deprivation during a multi-day event. Most concerning was an alleged incident where a student suffered a lacerated spleen after being slammed onto a table or similar surface during hazing rituals. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges and was subsequently suspended by the university.
• Subsequent Disciplinary Actions: UH has disciplined other fraternities for violations related to alcohol misuse, forced activities, and behavior “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort.” These incidents often result in chapter suspensions or lengthy probations, signaling the university’s official efforts to crack down on hazing. However, the limited public detail often means families must dig deeper to understand the full extent of prior misconduct.

These incidents highlight the severe risks, particularly physical injury and alcohol abuse, that can arise from hazing at UH chapter houses and off-campus events.

5.2.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For families in Kimble County whose children attend UH, a hazing case in Houston involves several key agencies and potential legal avenues:

• Law Enforcement Jurisdiction: Incidents at UH may involve the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) for on-campus matters, and/or the Houston Police Department (HPD) for off-campus events. Criminal hazing charges would be handled by the Harris County District Attorney’s Office.
• Civil Litigation: Civil lawsuits would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Houston and Harris County. Potential defendants would include individual perpetrators, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and potentially the University of Houston System and/or property owners (if off-campus).
• Challenge of Transparency: Unlike UT Austin, UH’s publicly available hazing data is not as granular. This makes thorough legal investigation essential to uncover prior disciplinary actions and institutional knowledge that can support a civil claim against the university or national organizations.

5.2.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents concerned about hazing at the University of Houston:

• Familiarize with UH Reporting: Understand and utilize UH’s official reporting mechanisms through the Dean of Students or UHPD.
• Document Vigilantly: Due to less public disclosure about specific incidents, meticulous documentation from victims and witnesses becomes even more critical. Screenshot all group chats, take photos of any injuries, and write down every detail immediately.
• Engage with Advocacy Resources: Reach out to UH’s confidential student support services or external anti-hazing hotlines if hesitant to report internally.
• Consult Houston-Based Legal Counsel: For families throughout Texas, including Kimble County, dealing with hazing at UH, contacting a lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases is vital. Our firm can leverage its local knowledge and experience to navigate Harris County courts, work with local law enforcement, and compel discovery of internal university and fraternity records that may not be publicly available.

5.3 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a legendary institution with deep roots in tradition (such as the Corps of Cadets) and a sprawling campus in Bryan-College Station, draws countless students from across Texas, including many from Kimble County. The university’s unique culture and strong institutional identity create a distinct environment for hazing dynamics.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M is renowned for its intense school spirit, its vast and influential Corps of Cadets (one of the largest uniformed student bodies in the nation), and a significant Greek life presence. The university’s emphasis on tradition, loyalty, and a strong sense of community, while often positive, can also create an environment where hazing is rationalized as “building character” or “preserving tradition.” Athletic teams and various student organizations are also deeply ingrained in A&M’s rich and complex culture.

5.3.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

Texas A&M strictly prohibits hazing, adhering to both state law and its own Student Rules. The university defines hazing broadly to include any physical or mental requirement that involves undue stress, public humiliation, or exposure to physical or psychological harm. A&M emphasizes that consent is not a defense. Reporting channels include the Department of Student Life, the Office of the Dean of Student’s Student Conduct Office, the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD), and specific mechanisms for Corps members. Although A&M provides information on sanctions for organizations, detailed public logs of specific hazing incidents are less accessible compared to some other major Texas universities.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Despite strict policies, Texas A&M has faced its share of significant hazing incidents, both within its Greek system and its storied Corps of Cadets:

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon Lawsuit (circa 2021): This highly publicized civil lawsuit involved allegations from pledges who suffered severe chemical burns. The claims stated that pledges were forced into strenuous physical activity and then had substances, including what was described as industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, poured on them. The burns allegedly required skin graft surgeries. The local Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) chapter was suspended by the university for two years, and the lawsuit sought $1 million in damages. This case echoes national SAE patterns involving severe physical and chemical hazing.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a federal lawsuit against Texas A&M and several Corps leaders, alleging degrading and physically abusive hazing. The cadet described incidents such as simulated sexual acts and being bound between beds in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth, resembling historical abuse allegations in military-style environments. The lawsuit sought over $1 million, leading Texas A&M to state its comprehensive review and handling of the matter under its internal rules.
• Kappa Sigma (2023, ongoing): Allegations of severe physical hazing, resulting in injuries such as rhabdomyolysis (a dangerous muscle breakdown from extreme physical exertion), have led to ongoing litigation against a Texas A&M Kappa Sigma chapter. This incident ties into the national Kappa Sigma history, noted earlier with the Chad Meredith drowning case, highlighting repeated patterns of dangerous physical hazing.

These incidents demonstrate that hazing at Texas A&M can stem from various corners of campus life, often leveraging traditions in dangerous ways to create a false sense of belonging or toughness.

5.3.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For families in Kimble County with Aggies, a hazing case in Bryan-College Station involves distinct legal realities:

• Law Enforcement Jurisdiction: Incidents would likely involve the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) for on-campus issues and/or the Bryan Police Department or College Station Police Department for off-campus events. Criminal charges would be handled by the Brazos County District Attorney’s Office.
• Civil Litigation: Civil lawsuits would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Bryan-College Station and Brazos County. Due to Texas A&M being a public university, claims against the institution itself may encounter defenses relating to sovereign immunity, necessitating careful legal strategy to navigate exceptions or pursue individual university employees for gross negligence.
• Corps Dynamics: Cases involving the Corps of Cadets require a deep understanding of its unique chain of command, long-standing traditions, and how hazing can be embedded within its sub-cultures, often framed as “training” or “discipline.”

5.3.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents tied to Texas A&M, including those traveling from Kimble County:

• Research Organizations Thoroughly: Beyond general university policies, investigate the specific hazing history of any fraternity, sorority, Corps unit, or athletic team. The lack of detailed public hazing logs outside of aggregated reports means independent research and careful conversations are paramount.
• Understand Corps Culture: If your child is in the Corps, openly discuss the risks and the fine line between tradition and hazing. Ensure they know how and where to report concerns safely.
• Document Diligently: Given the strong “Aggie family” loyalty that can sometimes foster a code of silence, meticulous documentation of any hazing incidents (texts, photos, notes) is crucial.
• Contact Experienced Counsel: For families from Kimble County dealing with hazing at Texas A&M, consulting a lawyer skilled in Bryan-College Station hazing cases is essential. Our firm understands the intricacies of A&M’s unique environment, including the Corps, and can navigate the Brazos County legal system while working to overcome potential sovereign immunity defenses.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, nestled in Dallas, is a private institution with a prominent Greek life scene. Its unique status as a private university, distinct from public counterparts like UT or A&M, brings different considerations for families in Kimble County concerned about hazing.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is a private, affluent university known for its strong academic programs, beautiful campus, and vibrant social scene, heavily influenced by its extensive Greek system. Both Panhellenic and Interfraternity Council (IFC) organizations are well-established, along with NPHC and multicultural Greek groups. The university’s emphasis on tradition and exclusivity, while creating a tight-knit community for many, can also, unfortunately, provide fertile ground for hazing practices. The private nature of SMU means that public transparency regarding disciplinary actions can differ significantly from state-funded institutions.

5.4.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

SMU maintains strict anti-hazing policies that align with state law, unequivocally prohibiting any activity that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. Their policy covers both on-campus and off-campus activities, clearly stating that “consent” is not a defense. SMU provides various reporting channels, including the Dean of Students, the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards, and the SMU Police Department (SMU PD). Furthermore, SMU utilizes anonymous reporting systems, such as “Real Response,” to encourage students to come forward without fear of immediate identification.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

While private universities often provide less detail in their public hazing incident logs compared to public institutions, past events highlight ongoing challenges at SMU:

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): SMU suspended its Kappa Alpha Order chapter for several years following credible allegations of severe hazing. Reports indicated new members were paddled, forced to consume excessive alcohol, and subjected to sleep deprivation. The suspension involved significant restrictions on the chapter’s ability to recruit new members until around 2021. This incident mirrors national patterns of Kappa Alpha Order, an organization that has faced hazing allegations elsewhere.
• Ongoing Monitoring: SMU’s Student Affairs website indicates constant monitoring and disciplinary actions involving various Greek organizations, with sanctions ranging from probation to social restrictions for alcohol violations, disorderly conduct, and hazing-related issues. The university’s use of internal conduct processes means that thorough legal discovery is often necessary to uncover the full history of an organization’s misconduct, which is crucial for families from Kimble County pursuing legal action.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Kimble County families with students attending SMU, the legal process has some distinct characteristics:

• Law Enforcement Jurisdiction: Incidents at SMU may involve the SMU Police Department (SMU PD) for on-campus matters, and/or the Dallas Police Department (DPD) for off-campus events. Criminal charges would be handled by the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office.
• Civil Litigation: Civil lawsuits against SMU, its fraternities, or individuals would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Dallas and Dallas County. As a private university, SMU typically faces fewer sovereign immunity defenses compared to public institutions, which can simplify some aspects of civil litigation involving the university itself.
• Discovery & Transparency: Due to a potentially less public disclosure of fine-grained disciplinary actions, legal discovery—the process of compelling the university and organizations to produce internal documents—becomes even more vital for surfacing evidence of prior hazing, institutional knowledge, and lack of enforcement.

5.3.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

For students and parents concerned about hazing at SMU, including those from Kimble County:

• Utilize Anonymous Reporting Systems: SMU’s anonymous “Real Response” system or national hotlines can be a starting point for reporting concerns if there is fear of direct identification or retaliation.
• Understand Private University Dynamics: Be aware that information on prior incidents might be less public than at state schools. This emphasizes the need for diligent personal record-keeping and early legal consultation.
• Document Meticulously: As with any hazing incident, maintaining comprehensive records—screenshots of messages, photos of injuries or events, and detailed notes—is paramount.
• Engage Dallas-Based Legal Counsel: For families from Kimble County dealing with hazing at SMU, contacting a lawyer with experience in hazing cases in Dallas and Dallas County is highly recommended. Our firm has the expertise to navigate the private university context, engage with local law enforcement, and aggressively pursue discovery to uncover the necessary evidence for accountability.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, located in Waco, holds a unique position among Texas universities due to its religious affiliation and past high-profile scandals. For families in Kimble County, understanding Baylor’s distinct culture and response to student misconduct is crucial when considering hazing.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor University is a private, Baptist Christian university in Waco with a strong sense of community and tradition. It hosts numerous fraternities and sororities (Panhellenic, IFC, NPHC, and multicultural Greek councils) and a wide array of student organizations, including athletic teams, spirit groups, and faith-based associations. Baylor’s values-based mission, while promoting community, has sometimes been challenged by incidents of misconduct, including a significant football and Title IX scandal in the past that led to intense scrutiny of institutional oversight and accountability.

5.5.2 Hazing Policy & Reporting

Baylor university unequivocally prohibits hazing, in strict accordance with Texas state law and its own institutional code of conduct. The university defines hazing to include any intentional or reckless act committed by a student that causes, or is reasonably likely to cause, mental or physical discomfort, humiliation, or ridicule, for the purpose of initiation, admission, affiliation, or continuation of membership in any organization. Baylor’s policy explicitly states that “consent” is not a defense and covers both on-campus and off-campus activities. Reporting channels include the Baylor Department of Public Safety (BUPD), the Dean of Students office, and specific ethics and compliance hotlines.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor’s history of challenges with institutional accountability and student conduct provides an important backdrop for any hazing concerns:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): An investigation at Baylor led to the suspension of 14 baseball players midway through the season due to hazing violations. While the specific details of the hazing were not fully publicized, the sheer number of disciplinary actions highlighted a significant problem within a high-profile athletic program. This incident, just a few years ago, shows that hazing can persist within Baylor’s competitive athletic environment despite institutional efforts.
• Historic Oversight Concerns: Baylor’s prior handling of sexual assault cases and its institutional response to misconduct in its football program led to national headlines and a complete overhaul of its leadership. This context means that any new allegations of hazing or student misconduct are likely to receive intense scrutiny and will be viewed through the lens of the university’s past challenges with oversight and transparency.

These incidents underscore that even at institutions with strong moral codes and a commitment to reform, hazing can be a persistent challenge, and vigilance remains critical for families in Kimble County.

5.5.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Kimble County families encountering hazing at Baylor, the legal process will have distinct elements:

• Law Enforcement Jurisdiction: Incidents would likely involve the Baylor University Police Department (BUPD) for on-campus matters, and/or the Waco Police Department (WPD) for off-campus events. Criminal charges would be handled by the McLennan County District Attorney’s Office.
• Civil Litigation: Civil lawsuits against Baylor, its fraternities, or individuals would be filed in courts with jurisdiction over Waco and McLennan County. As a private university, Baylor generally faces fewer sovereign immunity defenses than public institutions, meaning that civil claims against the university itself can sometimes be more direct.
• Institutional Accountability: Due to Baylor’s history of high-profile misconduct cases, claims of negligent supervision or a failure to enforce policies in hazing cases may receive heightened scrutiny, potentially bolstering a plaintiff’s ability to demonstrate institutional liability.

5.5.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

For students at Baylor and their families in Kimble County:

• Scrutinize Organizations Carefully: While Baylor’s values-based mission is important, families should still investigate the specific disciplinary history of any organization their child joins.
• Understand Baylor’s Reporting Structure: Familiarize yourselves with Baylor’s multiple reporting channels, including the BUPD and the Dean of Students office, and understand how they interact with the university’s code of conduct.
• Document and Seek Support: Meticulous documentation of any hazing incidents (digital evidence, photos, notes) is critical. Baylor’s private nature means that such internal records can be even more important for a legal case. Seek support from trusted faculty, counselors, or external anti-hazing resources.
• Contact Waco-Based Legal Counsel: For families from Kimble County dealing with hazing at Baylor, consulting a lawyer with experience in hazing cases in Waco and McLennan County is advisable. Our firm can provide tailored advice, helping navigate Baylor’s specific institutional dynamics and legal environment.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

For families in Kimble County, understanding the connection between local chapters and their national organizations is crucial. When incidents occur at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, or Baylor, the local chapter is rarely an island. They are typically part of larger national fraternities and sororities, many of which have extensive, often troubling, histories of hazing.

Why National Histories Matter in Texas Hazing Cases

Many fraternities and sororities operating at Texas universities—including those popular at UH, Texas A&M, UT, SMU, and Baylor—are chapters of national organizations. These national headquarters maintain governing documents, receive dues, provide training, and theoretically supervise their chapters.

Here’s why their national history is so significant in a Texas hazing case:

• Foreseeability: National organizations often have thick anti-hazing manuals and elaborate risk management policies for a reason: they have witnessed serious injuries, deaths, and extensive litigation stemming from hazing across their chapters nationwide. These prior incidents provide compelling evidence that certain types of hazing (e.g., forced alcohol consumption, physical abuse) are foreseeable risks within their organization.
• Pattern Evidence: When a local Texas chapter repeats the same dangerous “traditions” that led to a death or severe injury at another chapter in a different state, it demonstrates an alarming pattern. This pattern evidence can be used to argue that the national organization had constructive notice of the danger and failed to adequately intervene, enforce its policies, or prevent recurrence.
• Institutional Knowledge: National HQs collect incident reports, disciplinary records, and financial contributions from all their chapters. This gives them a vast amount of institutional knowledge about where hazing hot spots exist and what methods are commonly employed.
• Underpinning Liability: Courts can examine whether national organizations meaningfully enforced their anti-hazing policies, responded aggressively enough to prior incidents, or if their policies were merely “paper policies” designed to avoid liability rather than genuinely prevent harm. This can significantly impact a national organization’s liability for negligence or even support claims for punitive damages.

Organization Mapping: Connecting Local Chapters to National Patterns

While we cannot list every chapter and its full history, we can highlight some prominent fraternities and sororities present at Texas universities and connect them to nationally recognized hazing issues. This information is vital for families from Kimble County understanding the potential risks their children face.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): This fraternity has chapters across Texas, including at the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor. Its national history is unfortunately fraught with severe hazing incidents. Most notably, Stone Foltz at Bowling Green State University (2021) died from alcohol poisoning after a “Big/Little” night forced consumption. The family received a $10 million settlement. Another Pike case involved David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University (2012), who also died from alcohol poisoning, leading to a $14 million settlement. These cases demonstrate a clear pattern of dangerous alcohol-related hazing within Pike chapters that is directly relevant to any Pike chapter in Texas.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): SAE has a presence at many Texas schools, including UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin. Nationally, SAE has faced numerous hazing-related deaths and severe injuries, leading the national organization to (unsuccessfully) attempt to eliminate the pledge process in 2014. Recent incidents include a traumatic brain injury lawsuit at the University of Alabama (2023). Most relevant to Texas families, a Texas A&M SAE chapter faced a $1 million lawsuit after pledges suffered severe chemical burns from industrial-strength cleaner (2021), and a UT Austin SAE chapter faced a $1 million lawsuit for assault allegations (2024), adding to their existing suspension for hazing. These cases show a pattern of both physical and chemically violent hazing within SAE nationally and within Texas itself.

• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, Phi Delta Theta has also faced national scrutiny. Most notably, Maxwell “Max” Gruver at LSU (2017) died after a “Bible study” drinking game, leading to the Max Gruver Act in Louisiana (felony hazing). This incident highlights the prevalence of coerced drinking under ritualistic names.

• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Chapters exist at UH and Texas A&M. Andrew Coffey at Florida State University (2017) died from alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night,” following forced consumption of hard liquor. This reinforces the pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing.

• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): Chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and SMU. The fraternity was at the center of the Timothy Piazza tragedy at Penn State (2017), where a pledge died after extreme alcohol consumption and delayed medical help, leading to significant criminal and civil actions.

• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): Found at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor. This organization has a particularly grim national history, including the Chad Meredith case (University of Miami, 2001), where a pledge drowned while intoxicated after being persuaded to swim across a lake, leading to a $12.6 million verdict and a state law named in his honor. A recent Texas A&M Kappa Sigma chapter (2023) also faces ongoing litigation for alleged hazing causing severe injuries including rhabdomyolysis. This indicates a concerning pattern of physical hazing within the organization.

• Sigma Chi (ΣΧ): With chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, and Baylor, Sigma Chi faced one of the largest known hazing settlements in 2024—more than $10 million in damages—from a College of Charleston pledge who alleged severe physical beatings, forced drug/alcohol consumption, and psychological torment. Another incident at UT Arlington in 2020 resulted in a pledge’s hospitalization for alcohol poisoning due to hazing, showcasing both physical and alcohol-related hazards.

• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI): While not as widely present at all Texas schools, it is at Texas A&M. This fraternity was responsible for the catastrophic injury to Danny Santulli at the University of Missouri (2021), who suffered severe, permanent brain damage after being forced to consume excessive alcohol. This case resulted in multi-million-dollar settlements with 22 defendants.

• Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ): Present in NPHC at UH and Texas A&M. This historically Black fraternity has a national history of severe physical hazing, including the Joseph Snell case (Bowie State University, 1997) where a pledge suffered severe beatings over four weeks, leading to a $375,000 verdict that established the liability of international organizations for hazing. More recently, a federal lawsuit was filed against a University of Southern Mississippi Omega Psi Phi chapter for alleged repeated beatings with wooden paddles and requiring emergency surgery (2023).

Tie Back to Legal Strategy: Beyond Local Incidents

The connection between local Texas chapters and their national organizations’ hazing histories provides critical leverage in civil litigation. For families in Kimble County who have suffered due to hazing:

• Demonstrating Foreseeability: We can argue that national organizations had a clear pattern of risky behavior and inherent dangers, meaning an incident at a Texas chapter was entirely foreseeable.
• Challenging “Rogue Chapter” Defenses: The defense that “this was a rogue chapter” or “the national didn’t know” becomes significantly weaker when a history of similar incidents across the country exists.
• Strengthening Claims Against National Entities: This pattern evidence helps establish a national entity’s duty of care, its failure to enforce its own policies, and its negligence in preventing repeat offenses.
• Impacting Insurance Coverage: Knowledge of national patterns can influence how insurance companies evaluate coverage and liability, often bringing more pressure to settle.

At Attorney911, we leverage this extensive knowledge of national hazing patterns to build robust cases for Texas families. We understand that justice often requires looking beyond the local incident and examining the full organizational history to hold all responsible parties accountable.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

For families in Kimble County pursuing a hazing lawsuit, the process is far more complex than simply recounting what happened. It requires meticulous evidence collection, a deep understanding of damages, and a sophisticated legal strategy. At The Manginello Law Firm, we approach hazing cases with the same intensity and investigative rigor we bring to complex personal injury and wrongful death cases.

Evidence: The Foundation of Your Claim

In hazing litigation, evidence is paramount. It tells the story, establishes accountability, and counters the inevitable attempts at denial or cover-up. The nature of modern hazing means much of the crucial evidence is digital, hidden, or intentionally destroyed. Our team excels at uncovering and preserving these vital pieces of information.

• Digital Communications: In today’s interconnected world, group chats and direct messages (DMs) are often the smoking gun in hazing cases. This includes:

  • GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Slack, and other messaging apps.
  • Instagram DMs, Snapchat messages, TikTok comments, and private social media groups.
  • Evidence often includes messages planning the hazing, issuing commands, showing coercion, discussing cover-ups, or even ridiculing pledges.
  • We utilize digital forensics experts to recover deleted messages, but immediate screenshots by victims or witnesses are gold. Attorney911’s video, “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs), provides invaluable tips on how to properly collect and preserve this critical digital evidence.

• Photos & Videos: Visual evidence is incredibly powerful.

  • Content filmed by members during hazing events (often shared in private group chats, then deleted).
  • Footage posted (even temporarily) on social media, showing forced activities, excessive drinking, or humiliating acts.
  • Security camera footage from chapter houses, university buildings, or private venues.
  • Photos of injuries (bruises, burns, lacerations) taken immediately after the incident and over subsequent days to document their progression.

• Internal Organization Documents: These provide insight into an organization’s true culture and its knowledge of hazing. This can include:

  • “Pledge manuals,” initiation scripts, or “traditions” lists that outline hazing activities.
  • Emails or text messages from officers discussing activities to be performed by new members.
  • National fraternity/sorority policies, anti-hazing training materials, and risk management guidelines.
  • Reports from advisers or prior complaints that were ignored.

• University Records: We meticulously seek university records, which can reveal:

  • Prior conduct files, disciplinary actions, probations, or suspensions concerning the involved organization.
  • Incident reports filed with campus police or student conduct offices.
  • Clery Act reports and other public safety disclosures.
  • Internal emails between administrators discussing the organization’s history or specific hazing allegations.

• Medical and Psychological Records: These are essential for documenting the full extent of the victim’s harm:

  • Emergency room reports, ambulance records, and hospitalization notes.
  • Results of toxicology tests (e.g., blood alcohol content) and imaging (X-rays, CT scans, MRIs).
  • Records from treating physicians, specialists (e.g., neurologists for brain injuries), and rehabilitation therapists.
  • Psychological evaluations and therapy notes documenting conditions like PTSD, depression, anxiety, or suicidal ideation resulting from the hazing.

• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are often crucial. This includes:

  • Other pledges or members who were present (even if initially hesitant, many will cooperate when protected by legal counsel).
  • Roommates, friends, Resident Advisors (RAs), coaches, or bystanders who noticed changes in behavior or witnessed parts of the hazing.
  • Former members who left the organization due to hazing, whose testimony can establish a pattern.

Damages: Understanding What You Can Recover

Hazing can inflict profound and lasting harm, both economic and non-economic. For families in Kimble County, understanding the full scope of potential damages is critical to ensuring comprehensive accountability.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This includes immediate costs like emergency room visits, ambulance transport, and hospitalization, as well as long-term expenses such as surgeries, physical therapy, medications, and ongoing mental health counseling. In cases of catastrophic injury (e.g., brain damage, organ failure), a “life care plan” will project lifetime medical and support needs, potentially totaling millions of dollars.

• Lost Earnings / Educational Impact: This covers lost wages if the victim or a parent had to take time off work, as well as the long-term impact on the victim’s earning potential. If injuries lead to missed semesters, delayed graduation, or reduced ability to work, an economist will calculate the diminished future earning capacity.

• Non-Economic Damages: These subjective but legally compensable damages address the profound human suffering caused by hazing:

  • Physical Pain and Suffering: From injuries sustained to ongoing chronic pain.
  • Emotional Distress, Trauma, and Humiliation: This can include diagnoses such as PTSD, severe anxiety, depression, and the deep psychological scars from degradation and abuse.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: If the victim can no longer participate in activities they once loved (sports, hobbies) or experiences a significantly reduced quality of life.

• Wrongful Death Damages (for families): When hazing leads to a fatality, surviving family members (parents, children, spouse) can seek compensation for:

  • Funeral and burial costs.
  • Loss of financial support the deceased would have provided.
  • Loss of companionship, love, and society, which accounts for the deep emotional void left by their passing.
  • The grief and mental anguish experienced by the surviving family members. The Manginello Law Firm has extensive experience in wrongful death claims (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/), having recovered millions for families in catastrophic cases, leveraging this expertise for hazing victims.

• Punitive Damages: In cases where the defendants’ conduct was particularly reckless, malicious, or demonstrated a willful disregard for safety, punitive damages may be sought. These are designed to punish the wrongdoers and deter similar behavior in the future. Texas law allows for punitive damages (also known as exemplary damages), though there can be caps in certain types of cases.

Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage: A Strategic Chess Match

Hazing cases often involve multiple layers of defendants, each with their own legal counsel, and crucially, their own insurance policies. Navigating this landscape requires sophisticated legal expertise.

• Insurance Coverage Fights: National fraternities, universities, and individual members often carry various liability insurance policies. However, insurers frequently try to avoid paying by arguing that hazing, as an “intentional act” or “criminal” behavior, is excluded from coverage. This is where an experienced hazing lawyer becomes critical. As a former insurance defense attorney, Lupe Peña’s background (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/) is invaluable. We know how to argue that even if the hazing was intentional, the negligent supervision or failure to enforce policies by the organization or university is covered, forcing insurers to defend and payout.

• Strategic Litigation: Our strategy involves identifying all potentially responsible parties—from individual students to the local chapter, national organization, and university—to maximize the chances of a comprehensive recovery. We understand how to overcome common defenses like “the pledge consented” (which Texas law explicitly rejects) or “this was a rogue chapter” (by demonstrating forensically that the national organization had prior knowledge or a pattern of neglect). The Manginello Law Firm’s complex litigation experience, including taking on corporate giants in cases like the BP Texas City explosion, means we are not intimidated by powerful institutions or their deep-pocketed defense teams.

For families in Kimble County, Attorney911 serves as a formidable advocate, navigating these complex battles to secure justice and accountability.

Practical Guides & FAQs

When hazing strikes, families in Kimble County need immediate, actionable advice. These guides offer concrete steps for parents, students, and witnesses, empowering them to protect themselves and seek justice.

8.1 For Parents in Kimble County: Recognizing & Responding to Hazing

Your intuition as a parent is a powerful tool. Learn to recognize the subtle and overt signs of hazing, even if your child is away at a university in Austin, College Station, or Houston.

• Warning Signs of Hazing:

  • Unexplained Injuries: Look for bruises, burns, cuts, or repetitive injuries (e.g., from falling or forced calisthenics) where your child’s explanation doesn’t quite add up.
  • Sudden Exhaustion & Sleep Deprivation: Constant late-night calls for “mandatory” activities, or reports of extreme tiredness beyond normal academic stress.
  • Drastic Mood & Behavioral Changes: Unexpected anxiety, depression, irritability, withdrawal from friends/family, or a sudden guarded secrecy about their organization.
  • Constant Phone Demand & Anxiety: Your child is obsessively checking group chats on GroupMe or Snapchat, seems anxious about missing a message, and receives calls/texts at all hours.
  • Academic Decline: Sudden drops in grades, missed classes, or a lack of focus suggesting exhaustion and stress from extracurricular demands.
  • Financial Red Flags: Unexplained requests for money, strange “fines,” or large expenses that don’t fit normal student life.

• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach them with empathy, not accusation. State your observations gently (“You seem really tired lately,” “I noticed you’re quieter”). Emphasize their safety over any organizational loyalty. Reassure them that you will support them regardless and that their well-being is your top priority. Ask open-ended questions like, “What does ‘new member education’ really entail?” or “Is there anything about your group that makes you uncomfortable?”

• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize their physical and mental safety immediately. Get them medical attention—whether at the campus health center, urgent care, or an emergency room. While seeking medical care, ensure that the medical providers are clearly informed that the injuries or symptoms are related to hazing. As soon as safely possible, document everything: take clear, timestamped photos of injuries, screenshot any relevant messages or social media posts, and write down every detail your child shares (who, what, when, where, and what was said).

• Dealing with the University: Document every conversation with university staff, including names, dates, times, and what was discussed. Be prepared to ask tough questions about prior incidents involving the organization, what the school already knew, and what actions (if any) were taken. Do not rely solely on the university to handle the situation, as their priorities may differ from yours.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: If your child has sustained significant physical or psychological harm, or if you feel the university or organization is minimizing what happened, it is time to contact an experienced hazing attorney. We can help you navigate these complex situations, protect your child’s rights, and pursue accountability.

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

If you’re a student from Kimble County participating in a group at a Texas university, it’s vital to recognize the signs of hazing and know your rights, especially when the line between “tradition” and abuse blurs.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? Ask Yourself:

  • Am I being forced or pressured to do something I don’t want to do?
  • Would I do this activity if older members weren’t watching or if there were no social consequences?
  • Is this activity humiliating, illegal, or potentially dangerous to my physical or mental health?
  • Would my parents or the university approve if they knew exactly what was happening?
  • Are older members making new members do things they don’t have to do themselves? If you answered “yes” to any of these, it is likely hazing.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Despite what older members might say, your “agreement” to participate does not make hazing legal or justifiable. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. The law recognizes that consent given under intense peer pressure, the desire to belong, or fear of exclusion is not true voluntary consent. You have the right to be safe.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely: If you feel unsafe or want to leave, you have the legal right to do so at any time. You can send a brief email or text to the chapter president or new member educator stating, “I am resigning my pledge/membership effective immediately.” Do not agree to a “final meeting” where you might face pressure or retaliation. If you fear retaliation, report it immediately to the Dean of Students, campus police, or off-campus legal counsel. Most schools, and Texas law, offer good-faith reporter protection for those who report hazing or call for medical help.

• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: If someone (including you) needs medical attention during a hazing incident, call 911 immediately. In Texas, and at most universities, there are amnesty policies protecting individuals who seek emergency medical assistance, even if underage drinking or drug use was involved. Your safety, and the safety of others, is the absolute priority.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses: A Path to Accountability

If you’re a former member or a witness to hazing, you may be grappling with guilt, fear, or a desire to do the right thing after realizing the severity of what occurred.

• Acknowledge Your Role (Past or Present): We understand this is a difficult position. Whether you participated, stood by, or simply witnessed, coming forward can be daunting.
• Your Testimony Can Save Lives: Your knowledge and testimony can be instrumental in preventing future harm, holding perpetrators accountable, and bringing justice to victims. You may possess crucial evidence (digital communications, photos, knowledge of traditions) that is vital to a case.
• Seek Legal Counsel: If you are considering coming forward or believe you may have some legal exposure from past involvement, it is wise to seek your own legal advice. An attorney can explain your rights, options, and how cooperating might impact your situation. While confronting your past can be challenging, contributing to accountability is a powerful step towards preventing further tragedies.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Hazing Case

Hazing cases are inherently difficult due to cover-ups, fear, and institutional power. For families in Kimble County and across Texas, avoiding common pitfalls is crucial to protecting your rights and securing justice. Attorney911’s video, “Client Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Injury Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY), provides excellent general advice that applies directly to hazing incidents.

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

   • What Parents Think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble or embarrass themselves.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: This looks like a cover-up and can be perceived as obstruction of justice. It dramatically weakens your case, as digital evidence is frequently the most compelling.
   • What to Do Instead: Preserve everything immediately, no matter how trivial or embarrassing it seems. Backup all screenshots and digital files to a secure, independent location.

2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly:

   • What Parents Think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: This instantly puts the organization on alert. They will immediately “lawyer up,” instruct members to delete evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defenses, making subsequent investigation much harder.
   • What to Do Instead: Document your concerns privately, then contact an attorney before any direct confrontation.

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

   • What Universities Do: They may pressure families to sign waivers or agree to “internal resolutions” that offer minimal compensation in exchange for waiving your right to sue.
   • Why It’s Wrong: You could inadvertently forfeit your legal rights, and any offer made will likely be far below the true value of your case.
   • What to Do Instead: Do NOT sign anything from the university or organization without an experienced 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 and warn others.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: Defense attorneys can screenshot everything. Public statements can create inconsistencies that damage your credibility in court, potentially waive legal privileges, and complicate settlement negotiations.
   • What to Do Instead: Document privately and share information only with trusted legal counsel. Your lawyer can then strategically manage any public messaging.

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

   • What Organizations Say: “Just come talk to us before you do anything drastic; we want to hear your side.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: These meetings are often designed to pressure, intimidate, or extract statements that can be used against your child in later legal proceedings.
   • What to Do Instead: If you are considering legal action, all communication from that point forward should be handled by your attorney.

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

   • What Universities Promise: “We’re investigating; let us handle this internally to avoid disruptions.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: Evidence evaporates quickly, witnesses graduate and scatter, and the statute of limitations continues to run. University processes (which often prioritize the institution’s reputation) are distinct from mechanisms that provide real accountability and compensation.
   • What to Do Instead: Preserve all evidence immediately and consult with a lawyer who understands the different functions of university disciplinary actions versus criminal or civil justice.

7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer:

   • What Adjusters Say: “We just need your statement to process the claim and help your child.”
   • Why It’s Wrong: Insurance adjusters represent the interests of their company, not yours. Any recorded statement will be scrutinized for inconsistencies and used to minimize or deny your claim. Early settlements are almost always lowball offers.
   • What to Do Instead: Politely decline to speak with any adjuster and instruct them to direct all communications to your attorney.

8.5 Short FAQ

Answers to common questions for families in Kimble County and across Texas:

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”

  • Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities like the University of Houston, Texas A&M, and UT Austin have some sovereign immunity, but exceptions exist, especially for gross negligence, Title IX violations, or when suing specific employees in their individual capacity. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case is unique; contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”

  • Yes, it can be. While hazing is typically a Class B misdemeanor, it becomes a state jail felony under Texas law if it causes serious bodily injury or death. Furthermore, individuals who fail to report hazing can face misdemeanor charges, and organizations can be fined or lose recognition.

• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation?”

  • Absolutely. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. The law recognizes the immense peer pressure and power imbalances inherent in such situations, where true voluntary consent is often not possible.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”

  • Generally, the statute of limitations in Texas for personal injury and wrongful death claims is two years from the date of the injury or death. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this if the harm or its cause was not immediately apparent, or if the hazing was covered up. Time is critical—evidence disappears, witnesses’ memories fade, and organizations may destroy records. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 as soon as possible. Our video “Is There a Statute of Limitations on My Case?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c) offers further details.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”

  • The location of hazing does not eliminate liability. Universities and national fraternities/sororities can still be held liable based on their sponsorship of the organization, their knowledge of off-campus activities, and the foreseeability of hazing occurring there. Many high-profile hazing cases, such as Michael Deng’s death at a remote retreat, have successfully led to multi-million-dollar judgments despite occurring off university property.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”

  • While high-profile cases do attract media attention, many hazing cases are settled confidentially before trial. Confidentiality provisions can be negotiated as part of a settlement to protect your child’s privacy. We prioritize your family’s privacy while aggressively pursuing accountability.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family in Kimble County faces the life-altering consequences of hazing, you need far more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need tenacious advocates who understand the intricate legal frameworks, the psychological dynamics of hazing, and how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. This is where The Manginello Law Firm, operating as Attorney911, the Legal Emergency Lawyers™, stands apart.

From our primary office in Houston, and with additional offices in Austin and Beaumont, we serve families across the entire state of Texas, including those right here in Kimble County. We understand that hazing at Texas universities can deeply impact families, whether their children are attending the University of Texas at Austin just a few hours east, or further afield at Texas A&M, UH, SMU, or Baylor.

Why Attorney911 is the Right Choice for Your Hazing Case

• Insurance Insider Advantage: Our associate attorney, Lupe Peña, spent years as an insurance defense attorney at a national firm (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/lupe-pena/). She knows exactly how fraternity, sorority, and university insurance companies operate, how they value (and undervalue) hazing claims, and their strategies for delay, denial, and finding coverage exclusions. We know their playbook because we used to run it. This insider knowledge provides an unparalleled advantage in navigating complex insurance coverage disputes and securing maximum compensation for our clients.

• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions: Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, possesses extensive experience in complex litigation, including taking on corporate giants in cases like the BP Texas City explosion litigation (https://attorney911.com/attorneys/ralph-manginello/). We are not intimidated by national fraternities, powerful universities, or their well-funded defense teams. Our federal court experience (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) means we are equipped to handle cases involving Title IX, civil rights, and multi-district litigation—the very types of claims that can arise from severe hazing. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won. We know how to fight powerful defendants.

• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death and Catastrophic Injury Experience: Hazing too often leads to tragic deaths or life-altering injuries. Our firm has a proven track record of securing multi-million dollar settlements and verdicts in complex wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/wrongful-death-claim-lawyer/). We collaborate with leading economists, life care planners, and medical experts to accurately value not just immediate medical costs, but also long-term care needs for brain injuries, permanent disabilities, and the profound loss suffered by families. We don’t settle cheap. We build cases that force accountability.

• Dual Criminal and Civil Hazing Expertise: Ralph Manginello’s active membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) provides a deep understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil litigation (https://attorney911.com/law-practice-areas/criminal-defense-lawyers/). This unique perspective allows us to advise not only victims but also potential witnesses or former members who may face dual criminal and civil exposure, ensuring a comprehensive legal strategy.

• Investigative Depth: We understand that hazing cases are won or lost on the evidence. Our team utilizes a sophisticated network of experts—digital forensics specialists to recover deleted messages, medical experts to document injuries, and psychologists to assess emotional trauma. We know how to subpoena records from national fraternities, compel discovery of internal university files, and unearth hidden evidence like private group chats. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because for hazing victims, it often does.

Call to Action for Kimble County Families: You Don’t Have to Face This Alone

If your family in Kimble County has been affected by hazing at any Texas campus – whether your child attends the University of Texas at Austin, Texas A&M, UH, SMU, Baylor, or any other institution – you have the right to seek answers and accountability.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm today for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We’ll listen to what happened without judgment, explain your legal options, and help you decide on the best path forward for your family. Our contingency fee basis means we don’t get paid unless we win your case (learn more at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc), removing financial barriers to justice.

What to Expect in Your Free Consultation:

• We will listen empathetically to your story and your concerns.
• We will review any evidence you have managed to preserve, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• We will clearly explain your legal options, including pursuing a criminal report, a civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• We will discuss realistic timelines and what you can expect during the legal process.
• We will answer all your questions about our fee structure and how we operate.
• There is no pressure to hire us on the spot – we encourage you to take the time you need to decide.
• Everything you tell us is strictly confidential.

Whether you’re in Kimble County, grieving a tragic loss, or anywhere across Texas dealing with the physical and emotional scars of hazing, you don’t have to face this alone. Call us today.

Hablamos Español – Contact Lupe Peña directly for consultation in Spanish at lupe@atty911.com. Servicios legales en español disponibles.

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