Louisiana Fraternity Hazing Attorneys | $24M Pike Settlements | Attorney911 — The Firm That Closed Beta Nu | Federal Court | Former Insurance Defense | 1-888-ATTY-911

A Call for Vigilance: Protecting Our Children from Hazing at Texas Universities

The air is electric on campus. Your child, a bright student from right here in Louisiana, has just started their journey at a major Texas university – perhaps the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor. They’ve found a group they connect with, be it a fraternity, a sorority, an athletic team, or even a cherished campus spirit organization. It’s “initiation night,” a tradition they’ve heard about for weeks. But as the night wears on, the atmosphere shifts. What started as camaraderie turns into something darker. Your student is pressured to drink far beyond safe limits, endure physical abuse, or perform degrading acts. Others around them film the spectacle on their phones, chanting and laughing, yet no one steps in. Then, the unthinkable happens: someone gets hurt – falls, vomits, collapses – but nobody wants to call 911 because they’re afraid of “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble.” Your child stands there, a knot in their stomach, caught between loyalty to the group and growing fear for their own safety and the safety of their peers.

This is not a scene from a sensationalized movie. This is a terrifyingly common reality on campuses across Texas and the nation. And for families in Louisiana whose children attend these vibrant institutions, understanding the hidden dangers of hazing is not just important – it’s crucial for their safety and future.

This comprehensive guide is written for families in Louisiana and across Texas who need to understand the insidious world of modern hazing. We will delve into:

• What hazing truly looks like in 2025, stripping away old stereotypes and revealing its evolving, often digital, forms.
• How Texas and federal law address hazing, providing the legal framework for accountability.
• Critical lessons from major national hazing cases, and how these devastating incidents apply directly to Texas families.
• The specific hazing concerns and unique campus cultures at major Texas universities: University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, Southern Methodist University, and Baylor.
• How the history of national fraternities and sororities with documented hazing incidents can inform legal strategies at the local level.
• The legal options and strategies available to victims and families in Louisiana and throughout Texas.

This article is general information, not specific legal advice. The Manginello Law Firm is here to provide confidential, experienced legal counsel and evaluate individual cases based on their specific facts. We serve families throughout Texas, including Louisiana and all regional communities.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

• If your child is in danger RIGHT NOW:

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

• In the first 48 hours:

  • Get medical attention immediately, even if the student insists they are “fine.”
  • Preserve evidence BEFORE it’s deleted:
    • Screenshot group chats, texts, DMs immediately.
    • Photograph injuries from multiple angles.
    • Save physical items (clothing, receipts, objects).
  • Write down everything while memory is fresh (who, what, when, where).
  • Do NOT:
    • Confront the fraternity/sorority.
    • Sign anything from the university or insurance company.
    • Post details on public social media.
    • Let your child delete messages or “clean up” evidence.

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

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

Hazing in 2025: What It Really Looks Like

For Louisiana families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or campus organizations, hazing is often misunderstood. It’s not just the innocuous “pranks” portrayed in old movies or harmless “rites of passage.” In 2025, hazing is a serious, often brutal, and sometimes fatal form of abuse that inflicts profound physical, emotional, and psychological damage on students who simply want to belong. It’s designed to create a power imbalance, force conformity, and ensure secrecy, all under the guise of “building unity” or “earning membership.”

Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

Hazing is broadly defined as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student. This act endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student, and it occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

It is crucial to understand that “I agreed to it” or “it was voluntary” does not automatically make the activity safe or legal. When there is peer pressure, a significant power imbalance, and implicit threats of social exclusion or rejection from a desired group, true consent is often impossible. Hazing laws and legal precedent recognize that willingness to participate under such duress is not genuine consent, and therefore, it does not absolve perpetrators or organizations of liability. This distinction is vital for Louisiana families to grasp, as perpetrators frequently use the “consent” defense to avoid accountability.

Main Categories of Hazing

Modern hazing manifests in various escalating forms, moving beyond traditional physical acts to include insidious psychological and digital coercion. For Louisiana parents, recognizing these different categories is the first step toward protecting your child.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This is arguably the most common and deadliest form of hazing. It involves forced or coerced consumption of alcohol, often in excessive quantities, designed to lead to extreme intoxication. Examples include “lineups” where pledges consume multiple shots rapidly, games that require dangerous levels of drinking (such as “Bible study” or “family tree” games where incorrect answers necessitate drinking), or being pressured to consume unknown or mixed substances. Many hazing deaths are directly linked to acute alcohol poisoning, making this category particularly lethal. Perpetrators often normalize this behavior by calling it “partying” or “bonding,” yet it carries profound risks.

• Physical Hazing: This category involves acts that inflict bodily harm or extreme physical endurance. It can range from brutal paddling and beatings to extreme calisthenics, forced “workouts,” or “smokings” far beyond normal athletic conditioning. Sleep deprivation is a common tactic, forcing pledges to attend late-night events or perform tasks with minimal rest, leading to exhaustion and impaired judgment. Food and water deprivation, forced exposure to extreme cold or heat, or dangerous environments (like being abandoned in unfamiliar locations) also fall under this category. This type of hazing causes significant bodily injury, sometimes fatal, and can lead to long-term physical health issues.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These acts are designed to degrade, embarrass, and assault a pledge’s dignity and self-worth. It often includes forced nudity or partial nudity, simulated sexual acts (such as the notorious “elephant walk” or “roasted pig” poses), or being made to wear degrading costumes or outfits. These acts frequently have racial, sexist, or homophobic undertones, using slurs or forcing pledges to role-play stereotypes, creating an environment of profound psychological pain and trauma. This deeply personal abuse can lead to severe psychological scars and, in some cases, can escalate to sexual assault.

• Psychological Hazing: Often overlooked but equally damaging, psychological hazing targets a student’s mental and emotional well-being. This includes sustained verbal abuse, threats, intimidation, and deliberate social isolation from friends, family, or other campus activities. Pledges can be subjected to manipulative tactics, forced confessions, or public shaming in front of their peers, in meetings, or even online. This form of hazing erodes self-esteem, creates anxiety and fear, and can lead to severe mental health issues like depression, PTSD, and suicidal ideation.

• Digital/Online Hazing: This is a rapidly evolving and insidious form of hazing in the digital age. It leverages social media and communication apps to exert control, inflict humiliation, and enforce secrecy. Examples include group chat dares, forced participation in online “challenges,” or public shaming via platforms like Instagram, Snapchat, or TikTok. Pledges might be pressured to create or share compromising images or videos of themselves or others. This form of hazing is particularly dangerous because it leaves a permanent digital footprint, can spread rapidly, and often operates beyond the direct oversight of university authorities, making it harder to detect and stop. It’s subtle yet pervasive, often consuming a pledge’s entire waking life through constant demands and surveillance.

Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not confined to one type of campus group or one demographic. For Louisiana families, it’s vital to recognize that this dangerous behavior can infiltrate nearly any student organization. The desire for belonging, combined with the allure of tradition and social status, creates fertile ground for hazing rituals to take root and persist.

• Fraternities and Sororities (IFC, Panhellenic, NPHC, Multicultural): These are the most commonly associated groups with hazing, encompassing Interfraternity Council (IFC) and Panhellenic organizations (traditionally white fraternities and sororities), as well as historically Black Greek letter fraternities and sororities (NPHC), and emerging multicultural Greek organizations. Despite strict national anti-hazing policies, local chapters often adapt and hide their hazing practices, perpetuating harmful “traditions.”

• Corps of Cadets / ROTC / Military-Style Groups: In institutions with a strong military tradition, like Texas A&M’s Corps of Cadets, hierarchical structures and the emphasis on discipline can sometimes be twisted into hazing. Pledges, or “fish,” are often subjected to physically demanding tasks, sleep deprivation, and psychological pressure under the guise of “training” or “earning respect.”

• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs: Highly visible and prestigious groups, especially at large universities with strong athletic programs, can also engage in hazing. This includes cheerleading squads, dance teams, and university-specific tradition clubs (like the Texas Cowboys at UT Austin, or various “spirit” groups) that hold significant social capital. Members might be subjected to extreme physical demands, forced servitude, or demeaning rituals to earn their coveted positions.

• Athletic Teams (Football, Basketball, Baseball, Cheer, etc.): From high school to collegiate levels, athletic teams are frequently sites of hazing. This can involve forced alcohol consumption, physical abuse presented as “team bonding,” sexualized rituals, or psychological intimidation. The intense pressure to belong to a team, especially in an athletic scholarship context, can make reporting hazing incredibly difficult for student-athletes.

• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly benign organizations like marching bands, a cappella groups, or theatrical ensembles can hide hazing practices. These might involve sleep deprivation, forced public humiliation, or strenuous physical tasks framed as “discipline” or “artistic development.” The Robert Champion case at Florida A&M’s marching band tragically highlighted this overlooked area of hazing.

• Some Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: Any group with a strong hierarchy, high demand for membership, or significant social currency can become susceptible to hazing. Even groups focused on community service, cultural identity, or academic achievement can unwittingly or intentionally adopt abusive initiation practices, often rationalizing them as “tests of commitment.”

In all these contexts, what keeps hazing alive is a toxic combination of social status, a distorted sense of “tradition,” and a pervasive code of silence. Students fear social repercussions, exclusion, or even physical retaliation if they speak out, even when authorities say hazing is illegal and strictly prohibited. This silence allows the cycle of abuse to continue, often with tragic consequences.

Law & Liability Framework (Texas + Federal)

Understanding the legal landscape surrounding hazing in Texas is paramount for any family whose child attends university here. It’s a complex area involving both state and federal statutes, aiming to deter hazing and provide avenues for accountability and compensation for victims.

Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has specific, robust anti-hazing provisions primarily codified in its Education Code, Chapter 37, Subchapter F. This framework broadly defines hazing to cover a wide range of harmful activities, making it clear that such conduct is illegal and unacceptable.

Hazing is defined as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, performed on or off campus, by an individual alone or with others, that is directed against a student. This act must either endanger the mental or physical health or safety of a student and occur for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students.

For Louisiana families, this means that:

• Location is Irrelevant: Hazing is illegal whether it happens on campus, in an off-campus house, at a private retreat, or anywhere else. The notion that “it happened off-campus so the school can’t do anything” is a common misconception and a poor legal defense.
• Harm is Broadly Defined: Hazing doesn’t just have to cause physical injury. Acts that substantially affect mental health or safety—like extreme humiliation, intimidation, prolonged sleep deprivation, or psychological manipulation—are also illegal.
• Intent: The perpetrator doesn’t need to have a malicious intent to harm. If their actions were “reckless”—meaning they knew or should have known of the substantial risk of harm and disregarded it—it falls under the hazing statute.
• “Consent” is Explicitly Not a Defense: Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that it is not a defense to prosecution for hazing that the person being hazed consented to the activity. This is a critical point that families often misunderstand; peer pressure and fear of rejection invalidate true consent.

Under Texas law, hazing carries criminal penalties:

• A basic hazing offense is a Class B Misdemeanor, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• If the hazing causes bodily injury, it escalates to a Class A Misdemeanor.
• Most crucially, if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death, it becomes a state jail felony, carrying more severe penalties and prison time.

Additionally, certain individuals can face penalties for failing to report hazing if they were a member or officer and knew about it, or for retaliating against someone who reports hazing. These are typically misdemeanors.

Criminal vs. Civil Cases

When hazing occurs, there are two distinct legal pathways for accountability: criminal cases and civil cases. It’s important for families in Louisiana to understand the differences, as each serves a different purpose for victims and society.

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (prosecutors) on behalf of the public. Their primary aim is to punish offenders for breaking the law. If successful, criminal cases can result in jail time, fines, and probation for individuals involved, or substantial fines for organizations. Hazing-related criminal charges can range from misdemeanor hazing offenses to more serious charges like furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, and even negligent homicide or manslaughter in fatal cases.
• Civil Cases: These are initiated by the victims of hazing or their surviving family members. The goal of a civil lawsuit is to seek monetary compensation (damages) for the harm suffered and to hold responsible parties financially accountable. Civil claims often focus on legal theories such as negligence (failure to exercise reasonable care), gross negligence (conscious indifference to extreme risk), wrongful death, negligent hiring/supervision, and premises liability. Sexual misconduct during hazing can also lead to claims of sexual assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Damages sought in civil cases can cover medical expenses, lost education/earning capacity, pain and suffering, and for wrongful death, loss of companionship and support.

It is crucial to note that criminal and civil cases can proceed independently or simultaneously. A criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for filing a civil lawsuit, and vice-versa. Even if criminal charges are not pursued or do not result in a conviction, victims and families can still succeed in a civil court, where the burden of proof is lower.

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

Beyond state laws, federal regulations also impose obligations on universities regarding hazing, particularly those receiving federal funding.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation, still being implemented, will significantly impact how colleges and universities address hazing. It mandates greater transparency by requiring institutions to publicly report all findings of hazing violations and related disciplinary actions. It also aims to strengthen hazing prevention education programs and ensure institutions maintain public hazing data. This act, coming fully into effect around 2026, will shed more light on hazing incidents and institutional responses nationwide, including at Texas universities.
• Title IX and Clery Act: These federal statutes primarily deal with gender-based discrimination and campus crime reporting, but they can be activated in hazing contexts.
  • Title IX prohibits sex-based discrimination in education. If hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, or creates a sexually hostile environment, Title IX obligations are triggered. This requires universities to investigate, provide interim measures, and implement remedies.
  • The Clery Act requires colleges and universities to disclose campus crime statistics and security policies. Hazing incidents involving assaults, alcohol or drug violations, or other crimes must be reported under Clery, potentially contributing to a pattern of known misconduct that could be used in civil litigation.

These federal statutes, along with Texas state law, create a network of legal protection and accountability designed to make campuses safer and ensure institutions respond appropriately to hazing.

Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

Holding responsible parties accountable in a civil hazing lawsuit often involves identifying multiple layers of culpability, reflecting the complex group dynamics and institutional failures sometimes intertwined with hazing. For Louisiana families, understanding the potential defendants is key to pursuing justice.

• Individual Students: These are the members or pledges who actively planned, encouraged, or directly participated in the hazing acts. This includes those who supplied alcohol to minors, carried out physical abuse, or facilitated humiliating rituals. Their personal actions can lead to liability based on assault, battery, negligence, or participation in illegal hazing.
• Local Chapter/Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or team itself can be sued if it operates as a legal entity. This includes the chapter as a whole, its officers, and individuals like “pledge educators” or “new member coordinators” who directly oversaw or directed the hazing. Liability arises if the chapter authorized or implicitly condoned the practices.
• National Fraternity/Sorority: Most Greek organizations have national headquarters that charter local chapters, set policies (including anti-hazing rules), collect dues, and often provide oversight or training. National organizations can be held liable if they:
  • Knew or should have known about a history of hazing within a specific chapter or across multiple chapters.
  • Failed to adequately train local members on anti-hazing policies.
  • Failed to properly supervise chapters and enforce their own rules.
  • Had reports of hazing but failed to intervene effectively.
    This “pattern evidence” is crucial, demonstrating foreseeability and negligence on the part of the national entity.
• University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself, along with its governing board (e.g., the UH System Board of Regents, the Texas A&M University System), can be held liable. While public universities in Texas may assert sovereign immunity, exceptions often exist for:
  • Gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct by university employees.
  • Failure to address known dangerous conditions (e.g., a history of hazing by a specific organization) under premises liability.
  • Violations of federal statutes like Title IX (if gender-based hazing occurred).
  • Inadequate supervision of student organizations or failure to enforce anti-hazing policies after receiving clear warnings.
    Private universities (like SMU or Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections than public institutions, potentially making direct claims against them more straightforward.
• Third Parties: Other entities can sometimes be drawn into a hazing lawsuit:
  • Landlords or property owners of off-campus houses where hazing took place, if they knew of and allowed dangerous activity.
  • Bars or alcohol suppliers who illegally served minors or visibly intoxicated individuals, under dram shop liability laws.
• Host Organizations: If a hazing incident occurs during an event co-sponsored or hosted by another organization, that group might also share liability.

Establishing liability requires a thorough investigation into the specific facts, policies, and actions (or inactions) of each potential defendant. An experienced hazing attorney can navigate this complex web of responsibility to ensure all accountable parties are identified and pursued.

National Hazing Case Patterns (Anchor Stories)

The tragic reality of hazing is underscored by a series of devastating incidents across the nation. These “anchor stories” not only highlight the severe consequences of hazing but also expose recurring patterns and institutional failures. While each case is unique, they collectively demonstrate the legal foreseeability of harm and the evolving scope of liability. For Louisiana families, these national precedents set the stage for understanding the gravity of hazing and the potential for legal recourse in Texas.

Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

The most frequent and fatal outcome of hazing involves coerced, excessive alcohol consumption. These cases often share a chillingly similar script: pledges forced to drink immense quantities of liquor, often to “earn” their place, followed by delayed medical attention as panicked members attempt a cover-up.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (2017): In one of the most publicized hazing deaths, Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died from traumatic brain injuries after a “bid acceptance” event. Fraternity security cameras captured him consuming excessive alcohol, falling repeatedly, and suffering severe injuries. The video later showed members delaying calling 911 for nearly 12 hours, attempting to cover up the incident. This case led to over a thousand criminal charges against fraternity members, substantial civil litigation, and the enactment of the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law in Pennsylvania. The takeaway: extreme intoxication, deliberate delay in seeking medical help, and a pervasive culture of silence are legally devastating and contribute to wrongful death.
• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (2017): Andrew Coffey, also 20, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them quickly. Multiple members were prosecuted, mostly pleading guilty to misdemeanor hazing charges. FSU temporarily suspended all Greek life, prompting a statewide anti-hazing movement in Florida. The takeaway: formulaic “tradition” drinking nights are a repeating script for disaster, and universities must take decisive action to curb them.
• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (2017): Max Gruver, an 18-year-old pledge, died with a blood alcohol content of 0.495% (almost six times the legal limit) after participating in a “Bible study” drinking game. Pledges were forced to consume alcohol whenever they answered questions incorrectly. Multiple members were charged, and one was convicted of negligent homicide. In response, Louisiana enacted the Max Gruver Act, making felony hazing a reality. The takeaway: legislative change often follows public outrage and clear proof of hazing, establishing stronger legal frameworks for victims.
• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (2021): Stone Foltz, also 20, died from alcohol poisoning after allegedly being forced to consume an entire bottle of whiskey during a “Big/Little” pledge night. Eight members were charged, and multiple convictions followed. The Foltz family secured a $10 million settlement ($7 million from Pi Kappa Alpha national and approximately $3 million from Bowling Green State University), which resulted in strengthened Ohio anti-hazing laws. The takeaway: universities can face significant financial and reputational consequences along with fraternities, and individuals in leadership roles can face substantial personal liability, as seen with Daylen Dunson, who was personally ordered to pay $6.5 million to the Foltz family.

Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, physical and ritualized hazing continues to cause severe injury and death, often under circumstances of extreme secrecy and deliberate isolation.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (2013): Michael Deng, a 19-year-old pledge, died during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. He was blindfolded, weighted with a backpack, and repeatedly tackled during a brutal ritual known as the “glass ceiling.” His severe traumatic brain injury was ignored for hours by members, who then attempted a cover-up. Multiple members were convicted, and, significantly, the national fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, banned from Pennsylvania for 10 years, and fined over $110,000. The takeaway: off-campus “retreats” are often deliberately chosen to hide hazing away from oversight, and national organizations can be held criminally liable for their chapters’ actions.

Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not exclusive to Greek life; it also pervades athletic programs where intense team bonding and hierarchical structures can be exploited for abuse.

• Northwestern University Football Scandal (2023–2025): Multiple former football players came forward alleging widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program over many years. This included forced nudity and simulated sexual acts. The scandal led to the firing of long-time head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who later filed a wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university, which was confidentially settled. The university faced multiple lawsuits from former players. The takeaway: hazing transcends Greek life, infiltrating high-profile athletic programs, raising profound questions about institutional oversight and the responsibility of coaches and administrators.
• Robert Champion – Florida A&M University Marching Band (2011): Robert Champion, a 26-year-old drum major, died after a brutal hazing ritual known as “Crossing Bus C” within the FAMU marching band. Members subjected him to severe physical beatings. Multiple band members were criminally convicted, and FAMU was held fully liable, settling with Champion’s family for $1 million. The takeaway: hazing liability extends beyond fraternities to include marching bands and other student organizations, underscoring the university’s broad responsibility to protect all students.

What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These harrowing national cases, along with many others, highlight undeniable common threads: forced consumption of dangerous substances, physical violence, humiliation, deliberate delay in seeking medical care, and concerted efforts to cover up evidence and silence victims. While these incidents occurred outside of Texas, they powerfully shape the legal landscape. Settlements in these cases routinely reach multi-million-dollar figures, demonstrating that when clear evidence of hazing and institutional negligence is presented, accountability is possible.

For Louisiana families with children attending Texas universities, these cases are not distant statistics. They illustrate the foreseeability of harm. When a Texas chapter of a national fraternity repeats the same dangerous scripts seen elsewhere, it strengthens arguments that the national organization knew or should have known about the risks but failed to prevent them. These national lessons arm legal strategies in Texas courts, advocating for similar levels of justice and accountability for our students.

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

Texas is home to some of the nation’s largest and most vibrant universities, attracting students from across Louisiana and the globe. While these institutions offer incredible opportunities, they are not immune to the pervasive problem of hazing. For Louisiana families, understanding the specific environments and historical contexts of hazing at the state’s major universities is critical for vigilance and protection.

Because Louisiana families frequently send their children to Texas universities, particularly those along the Gulf Coast, we will begin with a deep dive into the University of Houston, which is geographically closest to much of Louisiana and serves a diverse student body that includes many Louisiana residents.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, a Tier One research institution and a flagship university in the thriving metropolis of Houston, Texas, is a popular choice for students from Louisiana seeking top-tier education and career opportunities. Its close proximity to cities like Lake Charles, Lafayette, and Baton Rouge means countless Louisiana families have direct ties to UH. The campus is a dynamic blend of residential and commuter students, fostering a vibrant Greek life and a plethora of student organizations, which can unfortunately also include various forms of hazing.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UH is a large urban campus serving over 47,000 students, boasting a diverse and active Greek life comprised of fraternities and sororities from the Interfraternity Council (IFC), National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek councils. Beyond Greek life, UH offers a wide array of student organizations, including cultural groups, academic societies, and sports clubs, all of which contribute to the rich campus experience sought by Louisiana students. The campus culture is one of innovation and growth, but like any large institution, it faces the challenge of balancing student freedoms with safety and oversight.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at UH

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, explicitly prohibiting any hazing activity whether it occurs on-campus or off-campus. Their policy is comprehensive, specifically forbidding:

• Forced consumption of alcohol, food, liquid, or drugs.
• Sleep deprivation.
• Physical mistreatment, beatings, or excessive exercise.
• Mental distress, humiliation, or coercion as part of an initiation or affiliation process.

UH provides clear reporting channels for hazing incidents. Students and parents can report concerns directly to the Dean of Students Office, the UH Department of Public Safety (UHPD), or through an anonymous online reporting form. While these channels exist, cultural barriers and fear of retaliation often prevent students from using them effectively.

5.1.3 Example Incident & Response at UH

The University of Houston is particularly relevant to hazing litigation due to a significant ongoing case represented by Attorney911. Leonel Bermudez, a fall 2025 pledge to the Pi Kappa Phi fraternity’s Beta Nu chapter at UH, experienced severe hazing that culminated in acute kidney failure and rhabdomyolysis, requiring a four-day hospitalization. This alleged hazing included:

• Forced carrying of a “pledge fanny pack” containing degrading items like condoms and sex toys, with strict compliance threats.
• Strenuous physical activities at Yellowstone Boulevard Park, including over 100 push-ups and 500 squats that left Bermudez unable to stand.
• Being sprayed “like waterboarding” with a hose, and threats of actual waterboarding at an off-campus residence.
• Forced consumption of milk, hot dogs, and peppercorns until vomiting, followed by immediate sprints.
• Witnessing another pledge being hog-tied face-down with an object in his mouth.

Attorney911, led by Ralph Manginello and Lupe Peña, filed a $10 million lawsuit against UH, the UH System Board of Regents, Pi Kappa Phi national headquarters, the local housing corporation, and 13 individual fraternity members. This case, filed in late 2025, highlights the severe physical and psychological trauma hazing inflicts, and underscores the legal accountability of both individuals and institutions. In response to the allegations, Pi Kappa Phi national HQ suspended the Beta Nu chapter on November 6, 2025, and the chapter voted to surrender its charter eight days later, leading to its permanent shutdown. This incident demonstrates UH’s willingness to suspend chapters and serves as a stark warning about the dangers of hazing at the university.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For Louisiana residents, understanding the legal process for a hazing case at UH is essential. Due to UH’s public university status, the University of Houston and the UH System Board of Regents might assert sovereign immunity. However, as noted in Section 3, exceptions for gross negligence, willful misconduct, or specific federal claims like Title IX can overcome this defense. Additionally, individual employees, fraternity members, and national organizations typically do not have immunity.

Involved law enforcement agencies might include the UH Police Department (UHPD) for on-campus incidents, and the Houston Police Department (HPD) for off-campus events, given its location in Harris County. Civil lawsuits would likely be filed in Harris County civil courts. Attorney911’s deep roots and extensive experience in Houston and Harris County civil and criminal courts provide a distinct advantage in navigating this local legal landscape.

5.1.5 What UH Students and Parents in Louisiana Should Do

For Louisiana students attending or planning to attend UH, and their families, proactive steps can make a significant difference:

• Know the Policy: Familiarize yourself with the UH anti-hazing policy (available on the Dean of Students website).
• Report Concerns: Utilize UH’s reporting mechanisms: the Dean of Students Office, UHPD, or the anonymous online reporting form. If you fear retaliation, discuss these concerns with an attorney first.
• Document Everything: As in the Bermudez case, detailed records (screenshots, photos, witness accounts) are crucial. This applies to Louisiana families, as evidence from Houston-based hazing will be essential regardless of whether you reside in Louisiana.
• Seek Off-Campus Medical Care if Needed: If your child is injured, prioritize medical attention at a Houston-area emergency room or urgent care center. Ensure the medical staff are aware that the injuries are hazing-related.
• Consult Houston-Based Legal Counsel: An attorney deeply familiar with Houston’s court system and the University of Houston’s specific protocols, like Attorney911, is invaluable for navigating a case in this jurisdiction.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a storied institution in College Station, Texas, holds immense appeal for many Louisiana families. Its renowned academic programs and its unique, tradition-rich culture, centered around the Corps of Cadets, draw students seeking a distinct collegiate experience. While these traditions foster strong bonds, they can also, at times, become fertile ground for hazing.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Texas A&M is one of the largest public universities in the U.S., serving over 70,000 students. Its campus in College Station is steeped in tradition, particularly through the Corps of Cadets, the largest uniformed student body outside the federal service academies. Greek life is also prominent, with a large and active community of fraternities and sororities. The culture emphasizes loyalty, honor, and tradition, which, while beneficial, can sometimes be manipulated to perpetuate hazing rituals passed down through generations.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at Texas A&M

Texas A&M takes hazing seriously on paper, with policies prohibiting any activity that causes physical or mental discomfort, harassment, or ridicule for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. This applies to all student organizations, including Greek life, the Corps of Cadets, and club sports. Reporting channels include the Department of Student Conduct, the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD), and various anonymous reporting platforms. However, the deeply ingrained culture of secrecy and loyalty, particularly within the Corps, can present significant barriers to reporting.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at Texas A&M

Texas A&M has had several high-profile hazing incidents, highlighting the diverse contexts in which hazing can occur:

• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): A former cadet filed a lawsuit alleging severe and degrading hazing within the Corps, including forced nudity, simulated sexual acts, sleep deprivation, and being bound in a “roasted pig” pose with an apple in his mouth. The university stated it had handled the matter internally via its own rules. This case brought to light the potential for hazing, even in highly structured military-style organizations.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon Lawsuit (around 2021): Two pledges alleged they were subjected to severe physical hazing, including being stomped on, forced to drink beer and liquor, and doused with various substances, including an industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit, causing severe chemical burns and rhabdomyolysis. The chemical burns required skin graft surgeries. The pledges sued the fraternity for $1 million, and the chapter was suspended. This incident tragically demonstrates the extreme physical dangers unique to some hazing rituals.
• Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI) Death (2018): Pledge Joseph Little collapsed and died during pledging activities that were later found by administrators to be hazing. This incident was especially poignant as it occurred at the same chapter (Phi Gamma Delta) where another student, Trey Walker, had died of an asthma attack during hazing activities in 1997. This pattern underscores the issue of foreseeability for national organizations.

These incidents underscore that hazing at A&M impacts both Greek life and the Corps, leading to both university discipline and civil litigation. For Louisiana families, knowing these past events proves that hazing is a recurring issue at the university.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

As a public university, Texas A&M may assert sovereign immunity. However, claims of gross negligence or Title IX violations (if gender-based hazing occurs) can challenge this defense. Law enforcement agencies involved could include the Texas A&M University Police Department (UPD) for on-campus incidents and local College Station police. Civil lawsuits would typically proceed in Brazos County courts. The involvement of the Corps of Cadets adds a unique dimension, as hazing within this military-style organization might involve additional regulations and institutional pathways.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students and Parents in Louisiana Should Do

Families from Louisiana, considering or attending Texas A&M, should take specific precautions:

• Investigate Organizations: For any group, seek out its hazing history. While Texas A&M’s disclosure isn’t as robust as UT’s, past news reports are often available.
• Understand Corps Traditions: If joining the Corps, research the line between tradition and hazing. Know your rights and reporting options even within military structures.
• Document and Report Internally: Use A&M’s various reporting channels, including UPD, Student Conduct, or the anonymous hotline. If you choose to report, do so clearly and thoroughly.
• Consider Off-Campus Options for Confidentiality: For sensitive mental or physical health concerns related to hazing, consider off-campus medical or counseling services to ensure greater privacy from university influence.
• Consult a Texas Hazing Attorney: An attorney can advise on navigating A&M’s policies and legal system, especially given the complexities of sovereign immunity and the high-stakes culture surrounding hazing incidents.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin, a flagship institution and a top-ranked public university, is a prime destination for many ambitious students from Louisiana. Its dynamic academic environment, vibrant social scene, and enthusiastic longhorn pride make it a highly desirable choice. However, like other large universities, UT Austin has a documented history of hazing incidents across various student organizations.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

UT Austin is one of the largest universities in the country, with over 52,000 students. Located in the state capital, it boasts a rich history and a strong sense of tradition, including highly visible Greek life, athletic programs, and unique spirit organizations like the Texas Cowboys. The campus culture is energetic and competitive, and while these traditions contribute to school spirit, they can sometimes create environments ripe for unwelcome hazing rituals.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at UT Austin

The University of Texas at Austin has a strict anti-hazing policy outlined in its institutional rules. Hazing is defined broadly and explicitly prohibited for all student organizations. UT’s policy aligns with Texas law, forbidding any forced or coerced activity that endangers mental or physical health, or any form of humiliation or abuse.

Perhaps most notably, UT Austin stands out among Texas universities for its public Hazing Violations page (hazing.utexas.edu). This transparency initiative lists organizations, dates of incidents, a description of the conduct, and the sanctions imposed by the university. While this transparency is a step in the right direction, it also serves as a stark reminder of the persistent nature of hazing.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at UT Austin

UT Austin’s public database offers a glimpse into the recurring nature of hazing on its campus:

• Pi Kappa Alpha (2023): The chapter was found responsible for hazing after new members were directed to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, causing mental and physical discomfort. The chapter was placed on probation and required to implement new hazing-prevention education.
• Sigma Chi (2024 suicide): Parents of Sawyer Updike alleged hazing as a significant factor in their son’s suicide. This case highlights how emotional and psychological hazing can have devastating consequences even without overt physical acts. Given that this suicide involved members of Sigma Chi, this event merits deeper investigation into the circumstances that could lead to such a tragic outcome.
• Texas Wranglers (2018): This spirit organization faced severe sanctions after an investigation revealed hazing including forced workouts, alcohol consumption, and other forms of physical and mental abuse.
• Other Greek and Non-Greek Groups: The database regularly features groups sanctioned for offenses ranging from forced alcohol consumption to sleep deprivation and humiliating acts, often involving local fraternities (Texas Cowboys, Tejas Club) or other student spirit organizations. Our Attorney911 Bermudez case is rooted in hazing from a Pi Kappa Phi chapter at the University of Houston, an incident whose parallels to historical hazing cases can also be drawn from hazing that has occurred at the University of Texas in groups like the Texas Cowboys and Tejas Club. The culture of hazing that exists in some of these groups often results in a feeling of impunity and secrecy, thus contributing to the recurrence of hazing incidents without real accountability beyond administrative punishments.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (January 2024): An Australian exchange student alleged assault by fraternity members at a party, resulting in a dislocated leg, broken ligaments, fractured tibia, and a broken nose. He sued the chapter for over $1 million. The chapter was already under suspension for prior hazing and safety violations.

The regular updates to UT’s public log emphasize that despite policies and sanctions, hazing remains a persistent challenge that requires ongoing vigilance.

5.3.4 How a UT Austin Hazing Case Might Proceed

As a public university, UT Austin, like UH and Texas A&M, operates under the Texas Tort Claims Act, which provides some sovereign immunity. However, as noted before, exceptions can be made for gross negligence or Title IX claims. Law enforcement investigations could involve the UT Police Department (UTPD) and the Austin Police Department. Civil lawsuits would proceed in Travis County civil courts. The key advantage for plaintiffs in UT cases is the availability of past hazing violations in the public record, which can help demonstrate a pattern of misconduct and the university’s knowledge of ongoing issues.

5.3.5 What UT Austin Students and Parents in Louisiana Should Do

For Louisiana families involved with UT Austin, these steps are crucial:

• Utilize the Public Hazing Log: Before joining any organization, consult UT’s public Hazing Violations database to review its history.
• Report Concerns Promptly: Use UT’s confidential reporting forms, contact the Dean of Students, or UTPD. The transparency of the system encourages reporting, so use it.
• Document Everything Thoroughly: Given the recurring nature of incidents, meticulous documentation (photos, screenshots, witness accounts) can provide significant leverage.
• Seek Legal Counsel with Austin Experience: An attorney familiar with the Travis County court system and UT’s specific organizational structure, like Attorney911, can effectively leverage available public information and navigate legal complexities.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, a private institution nestled in a prestigious area of Dallas, Texas, is known for its strong academic programs, beautiful campus, and an exceptionally active Greek life. Many Louisiana families, particularly those seeking a selective private university experience with a vibrant social scene, look to SMU. While its private status offers certain benefits, it also means that information regarding campus conduct and hazing incidents may not be as publicly accessible as it would be at public universities.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

SMU is a private university with a student population of approximately 12,000, located in the affluent University Park area of Dallas. It boasts a thriving Greek life that plays a central role in student social culture, attracting a significant portion of the student body. The campus prides itself on its strong alumni network and sense of community, but this tight-knit culture can sometimes inadvertently enable hazing through a desire to maintain traditions and protect the institution’s image.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at SMU

SMU has clear anti-hazing policies that align with Texas law, prohibiting any form of physical, mental, or emotional abuse for the purpose of initiation or affiliation. The university’s policy condemns forced consumption of alcohol or drugs, sleep deprivation, and any activity that could endanger a student’s safety or well-being.

Reporting channels at SMU include the Dean of Students Office, the SMU Police Department (SMU PD), and various anonymous reporting platforms, including Real Response, a mobile app designed for confidential reporting of hazing and other misconduct. While these channels are in place, the culture of private universities sometimes means that internal administrative processes are prioritized, and external legal action often becomes necessary to ensure true accountability.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at SMU

While SMU does not maintain a publicly accessible database of hazing violations similar to UT Austin, incidents have been reported in the media and have led to significant disciplinary actions:

• Kappa Alpha Order (2017): This fraternity chapter was suspended for four years after an investigation revealed extensive hazing. Reports indicated new members were subjected to paddling, forced alcohol consumption, sleep deprivation, and other forms of physical and psychological abuse. The chapter faced restrictions on recruiting and operations until approximately 2021.
• Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI) (2019): After a hazing investigation, the FIJI chapter was placed on probation with strict restrictions, including a ban on social activities and new member recruitment. Details of the specific hazing acts were not widely disclosed but reportedly involved coerced alcohol use and other prohibited initiation activities.

These incidents demonstrate that even with internal reporting systems, hazing persists at SMU, and administrative sanctions are a regular occurence. For Louisiana families, it shows that hazing on private campuses can be just as serious as at public institutions, despite less public visibility.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

As a private university, SMU does not benefit from sovereign immunity, making it potentially more straightforward to pursue direct claims against the university itself, in addition to individual students, the local chapter, and the national organization. Investigations would involve the SMU Police Department (SMU PD) and, depending on the nature of the incident, the Dallas Police Department. Civil lawsuits would proceed in Dallas County civil courts. Discovering internal documents at private universities, while not subject to public records requests, can be compelled through the subpoena process in civil litigation, allowing experienced attorneys to uncover critical information.

5.4.5 What SMU Students and Parents in Louisiana Should Do

For Louisiana families whose children attend SMU, consider these actions:

• Document Evidence Diligently: Given the less public nature of hazing at private institutions, collecting and preserving all personal evidence (screenshots, photos, texts) is even more critical.
• Utilize Anonymous Reporting Tools: Tools like “Real Response” can provide a safer initial avenue for reporting without immediate fear of being identified. However, for a legal action, direct reporting will be necessary.
• Seek Off-Campus Medical and Counseling Support: For privacy concerns, access medical attention and psychological support from providers outside the university system, ensuring independent documentation of injuries or trauma.
• Consult a Dallas-Based Legal Expert: An attorney with significant experience in Dallas County courts and an understanding of private university dynamics, like Attorney911, can navigate the unique challenges of hazing cases at institutions like SMU.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, located in Waco, Texas, is a prominent private Christian university known for its strong academic reputation, faith-based mission, and passionate athletic programs. Many Louisiana families choose Baylor for its distinctive blend of faith, learning, and community. However, like any university, it has not been immune to hazing incidents, which can sometimes clash with its values-driven identity and commitment to student welfare.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot

Baylor is a private Christian university with approximately 20,000 students. Its campus in Waco cultivates a strong sense of community rooted in its Baptist heritage. Greek life is present, alongside numerous faith-based organizations, service groups, and nationally recognized athletic teams, especially in football and basketball. The culture emphasizes integrity and a commitment to personal responsibility, but achieving these ideals sometimes collides with the problematic aspects of student organizations, where traditions can lead to hazing. Baylor also has a history of intense scrutiny over its handling of sexual assault cases, which can influence how it responds to other forms of student misconduct, including hazing.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels at Baylor

Baylor University strictly prohibits hazing, articulating its policy through its Student Code of Conduct and specific anti-hazing directives. Its policy condemns any activity that is humiliating, intimidating, physically or psychologically harmful, or forced upon a student as a condition of membership. This includes forced alcohol consumption, sleep deprivation, physical activity resulting in exhaustion, and any act that defames or degrades a person.

Baylor provides various internal reporting channels, including the Dean of Students Office, the Baylor Police Department (BPD), and anonymous reporting options. The university emphasizes its “zero tolerance” for hazing, reflecting its commitment to student safety under its Christian mission.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses at Baylor

Baylor, like other universities, has seen hazing incidents across various student groups, including:

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): Following an internal investigation, Baylor suspended 14 baseball players for hazing violations in 2020. The suspensions were staggered throughout the season. While specific details of the hazing were not publicly released, university officials confirmed violations of anti-hazing policies, demonstrating that hazing can affect high-profile athletic teams even at institutions with strong ethical codes. This incident occurred shortly after Baylor’s football program faced a massive sexual assault scandal which highlighted significant institutional failures in handling student misconduct. This context suggests a heightened sensitivity on Baylor’s part to address any form of institutional failure.
• Greek Life Suspensions: Historically, various fraternity and sorority chapters at Baylor have faced probation or suspension for hazing-related offenses. These usually involve violations of alcohol policies, forced servitude, or other forms of initiation that contravene university rules.

These incidents highlight the ongoing challenge of enforcing anti-hazing policies despite Baylor’s stated “zero tolerance” stance. For Louisiana families, it underscores that even in faith-based communities, hazing can be a serious issue.

5.4.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

As a private university, Baylor does not have sovereign immunity, making it potentially liable directly in a civil lawsuit, similar to SMU. Law enforcement involvement could include the Baylor Police Department (BPD) for incidents on or near campus, and the Waco Police Department for off-campus events. Civil lawsuits would typically proceed in McLennan County civil courts. Given Baylor’s prior legal scrutiny regarding its handling of student misconduct, hazing cases against the university might face heightened internal and external scrutiny.

5.4.5 What Baylor Students and Parents in Louisiana Should Do

For Louisiana families with connections to Baylor, consider these proactive steps:

• Prioritize Independent Documentation: As with other private universities, diligent personal record-keeping (texts, photos, eyewitness accounts) is essential for any potential legal action, as university internal reports may not be fully public.
• Leverage Baylor’s Reporting Systems: Utilize the Dean of Students, Baylor PD, or anonymous reporting options. Clearly articulate that the behavior constitutes hazing under Texas law.
• Seek External Counseling and Medical Care: For privacy and independent record-keeping, consider a medical or psychological provider outside of Baylor’s direct system if your child requires care due to hazing.
• Consult Legal Expertise in Waco and Texas: An attorney with experience in McLennan County courts and an understanding of both Texas hazing law and the intricacies of private universities like Baylor, can provide crucial guidance on navigating these cases. Attorney911 operates across Texas and has the necessary experience to handle cases in Waco.

Fraternities & Sororities: Campus-Specific + National Histories

When facing a hazing incident at one of Texas’s major universities, it’s crucial for Louisiana families to understand that accountability often extends beyond just the local chapter and individual students. The national organizations that charter these local groups, while claiming to have strict anti-hazing policies, frequently bear significant responsibility due to their history of similar incidents across the country.

Why National Histories Matter

Many of the fraternities and sororities with chapters at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, as well as those attracting Louisiana students to other Texas schools, are part of larger, national organizations. These national headquarters (HQs) have vast resources, sophisticated risk management departments, and, critically, extensive files documenting hazing incidents in their chapters nationwide.

National HQs develop thick anti-hazing manuals and implement risk policies precisely because they have witnessed deaths, catastrophic injuries, and multi-million-dollar lawsuits stemming from hazing in their past. They understand the recurring patterns: forced drinking nights, physically demanding “traditions,” humiliating rituals, and the pervasive code of silence that protects perpetrators.

This national history is vital in legal strategy. When a Texas chapter repeats the same dangerous scripts that led to another chapter’s suspension, or to injury or even death in another state, it powerfully strengthens arguments of foreseeability. It demonstrate that the national organization knew or should have known about these specific risks, yet failed to implement effective measures to prevent them in the Texas chapter. This pattern evidence can be instrumental in:

• Establishing negligence and, in some cases, gross negligence against the national organization.
• Overcoming defenses that claim the incident was “unforeseeable” or involved “rogue individuals.”
• Increasing settlement leverage and the potential for punitive damages, depending on the jurisdiction and claims.
• Navigating complex insurance coverage disputes, as national organizations typically hold substantial liability insurance.

Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

Below is a synthesized overview of several prominent Greek organizations with a history tied to hazing, many of which have chapters at major Texas universities, along with documented national incidents. This is not an exhaustive list, but it highlights how national patterns inform local Texas risks.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (PIKE): This national fraternity has faced severe consequences for hazing. The tragic Stone Foltz case at Bowling Green State University (2021), where a pledge died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume a handle of alcohol, resulted in criminal convictions and a $10 million settlement. Another incident involved David Bogenberger at Northern Illinois University ($14 million settlement) who died in 2012 from alcohol poisoning. Such repeated alcohol-related deaths underscore a clear national pattern that any local Texas chapter is expected to avoid.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE): Often cited for a disproportionate number of hazing incidents, SAE nationally eliminated its pledge process in 2014, a policy change seen as a direct response to a string of hazing-related deaths and injuries. However, problems persist. Notable cases include a traumatic brain injury lawsuit filed against the organization at the University of Alabama (2023), and a lawsuit at Texas A&M University where pledges alleged chemical burns from being doused with industrial cleaner. In January 2024, an Australian exchange student sued the UT Austin chapter for over $1 million following an alleged assault.
• Phi Delta Theta (FIJI): This fraternity gained tragic national attention with the Maxwell “Max” Gruver death at Louisiana State University (2017), where a pledge died from severe alcohol poisoning during forced drinking games. This led to Louisiana’s felony hazing law, the Max Gruver Act. The death of Joseph Little at the Texas A&M chapter in 2018 under hazing-related circumstances underscores the national-to-local pattern.
• Pi Kappa Phi: Beyond our ongoing Leonel Bermudez case at the University of Houston (2025), this fraternity was involved in the Andrew Coffey death at Florida State University (2017) due to alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night.” The national organization, like others, implemented stricter policies following these high-profile incidents, yet chapters may continue to engage in dangerous activities, as alleged in the Bermudez case.
• Kappa Alpha Order: This fraternity has faced numerous suspensions and other sanctions across campuses nationwide for hazing practices, including at SMU (2017). Allegations often involve physical hazing, forced servitude, and alcohol abuse, typical of “traditional” fraternity hazing scenarios.
• Omega Psi Phi (ΩΨΦ): Historically, this fraternity has also faced allegations of physical hazing. A recent federal lawsuit (April 2023) against the organization at the University of Southern Mississippi alleged severe hazing including repeated beatings requiring emergency surgery and months of rehabilitation. This case is ongoing, demonstrating that hazing allegations are not limited to traditionally white fraternities.

Tie Back to Legal Strategy

The documented national histories of these organizations are not just cautionary tales; they are crucial components of a legal strategy in a Texas hazing case. For Louisiana families, this means:

• Foreseeability: A pattern of similar past incidents at other chapters—or even at the same chapter years prior—establishes that the national organization knew or should have known about the potential for harm. This makes it difficult for them to claim an incident was “unforeseeable.”
• Breach of Duty: When a national organization has publicly stated anti-hazing policies and a history of violations, a plaintiff can argue that the national breached its duty by failing to adequately enforce those policies, train its members, or supervise its local chapters effectively.
• Punitive Damages: In cases of egregious misconduct, evidence of a long-standing pattern of ignoring hazing or implementing ineffective “paper policies” can support claims for punitive damages. These damages are designed not just to compensate victims but to punish defendants for reckless or malicious conduct and deter future similar acts.
• Insurance Coverage: National organizations typically carry significant liability insurance policies. Demonstrating national-level culpability facilitates leveraging these policies for substantial victim compensation. An attorney experienced in these high-stakes cases can strategically challenge insurance companies who try to deny coverage based on “intentional acts” exclusions by focusing on the organization’s negligent supervision.

Understanding these national patterns allows Attorney911 to approach hazing cases in Texas with a powerful argument: that these were not isolated incidents, but rather a predictable consequence of organizational failures, demanding accountability from all levels of the fraternity or sorority structure.

Building a Case: Evidence, Damages, Strategy

Successfully pursuing a hazing case in Texas against individuals, local chapters, national organizations, or universities requires meticulous investigation, strategic legal planning, and a deep understanding of how to present overwhelming evidence. For Louisiana families, gathering the right information promptly and understanding its legal significance can be the difference between justice and continued silence.

Evidence

In hazing litigation, evidence is paramount. It tells the story of what happened, who was involved, and the extent of the harm. Today, particularly for Louisiana families needing to build a case in Texas, the digital trail is often the most critical category of evidence. Attorney911’s video, “Use Your Cellphone to Document a Legal Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLbpzrmogTs), offers invaluable insights into effective documentation.

• Digital Communications: These are often the “smoking gun” in modern hazing cases.
  • GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage, Discord, Snapchat, Instagram DMs, TikTok DMs: These platforms are used for planning, coordinating, issuing commands, and sharing media related to hazing. Text messages and direct messages reveal who knew what, when, and who participated.
  • Evidence includes: Screenshots of entire conversations (showing sender, timestamps, and context), videos of hazing shared in chats, and photos of injuries or humiliating acts. Crucially, even “disappearing messages” (like on Snapchat) can often be recovered by digital forensics experts, but immediate screenshots or screen recordings are ideal.
• Photos & Videos: Beyond what’s in chat logs:
  • User-generated Content: Footage filmed by members or pledges during events, often for social media or internal group sharing, can provide undeniable proof of hazing.
  • Surveillance Footage: Security cameras (at private residences, businesses, or university facilities), Ring doorbell footage, or even dashcam recordings can capture activities, arrivals, or departures related to hazing events.
• Internal Organization Documents: These shed light on official policies versus actual practices.
  • Pledge Manuals/Initiation Scripts: These may outline or subtly hint at expected “traditions” that constitute hazing.
  • Emails/Texts: Communications between local chapter officers, national representatives, or university advisors can reveal awareness or deliberate indifference to hazing.
  • National Policies: Detailed anti-hazing policies from the national organization can be used to show that the local chapter violated known rules, potentially implicating the national for negligent oversight.
• University Records:
  • Prior Conduct Files: Documents detailing past hazing violations, probation, or suspensions for the same chapter or individuals.
  • Campus Police/Student Conduct Reports: Internal investigations, incident reports, or anonymous tips regarding hazing activity.
  • Clery Act Reports: Publicly available crime statistics (including alcohol/drug violations, assaults) that may coincide with hazing periods or locations.
  • Public Records Requests (for public universities): In Texas, public institutions like UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin are subject to public information requests that can uncover relevant internal communications or incident reports.
• Medical and Psychological Records: These document the direct impact on the victim.
  • Emergency Room/Hospital Records: Detailed accounts of injuries, toxicology reports (for alcohol/drug levels), diagnoses (e.g., rhabdomyolysis, severe dehydration, head trauma).
  • Ongoing Treatment Notes: Physical therapy, psychiatric counseling, or long-term care plans for chronic physical or mental health conditions (PTSD, depression, anxiety).
• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are powerful.
  • Other Pledges/Members: Their testimony about the events, the atmosphere, and the coercion can be crucial, though they may fear retaliation.
  • Roommates, Friends, BYstanders: Individuals who noticed changes in behavior, witnessed physical signs of hazing, or saw the events unfold.

Damages

In a civil hazing lawsuit in Texas, the goal is to fully compensate the victim or their family for all losses suffered. These “damages” can be categorized as economic and non-economic.

• Economic Damages (Quantifiable Financial Losses):

  • Medical Expenses: This covers a wide range of costs, from immediate emergency care (ambulance, ER, hospitalization, surgeries) to long-term needs (physical therapy, psychological counseling, medications). In severe cases of catastrophic injury, a life care plan may be developed to project all future medical and personal care costs for the victim’s lifetime.
  • Lost Income & Earning Capacity: If the victim missed work, scholarship opportunities, or was forced to withdraw from school due to injuries, this covers lost wages and tuition. For permanent injuries (like brain damage), this includes the projected loss of lifetime earning capacity, calculated with economic experts.
  • Other Economic Losses: This can include property damage (phone, clothing, personal items destroyed during hazing) or even costs associated with transferring to a new school to escape the traumatic environment.

• Non-Economic Damages (Subjective, Legally Compensable Harm): These damages compensate for intangible losses that profoundly impact a victim’s quality of life.

  • Physical Pain & Suffering: Compensation for the actual physical pain endured from injuries, including ongoing chronic pain or discomfort.
  • Emotional Distress & Psychological Harm: This is a major component of hazing claims. It covers the profound mental anguish, humiliation, anxiety, depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and loss of dignity. Psychiatric counseling records and expert psychological evaluations are vital in proving these damages.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: This compensates for the victim’s inability to participate in activities that once brought them joy (sports, hobbies, social life) due to their injuries or trauma.

• Wrongful Death Damages (for Families): If hazing results in a fatality, specified family members (spouse, children, parents in Texas) can claim:

  • Funeral and Burial Costs.
  • Loss of Companionship, Society, and Love: Compensation for the emotional void, grief, and loss of relationship with the deceased.
  • Loss of Financial Support: If the deceased would have provided financial contributions to the family in the future.
  • Mental Anguish: The profound psychological suffering endured by surviving family members.

• Punitive Damages: In specific cases, particularly where the defendant’s conduct was grossly negligent (showing extreme recklessness or conscious indifference to a known risk), punitive damages may be awarded. These are not tied to actual losses but are designed to punish the defendant and deter similar behavior in the future. Evidence of a national organization repeatedly ignoring warnings about hazing, for example, can contribute to a claim for punitive damages.

It’s important to understand that while a lawyer cannot guarantee specific dollar amounts, experienced attorneys can thoroughly assess the range of damages in a hazing case to pursue maximum fair compensation.

Strategy

A successful hazing litigation strategy involves understanding both the legal landscape and the complex group dynamics surrounding these incidents. Attorney911 operates with a multi-pronged approach:

1. Comprehensive Investigation: We don’t just rely on police reports or university findings. We conduct an independent, exhaustive investigation, utilizing digital forensics for message recovery, expert investigators to interview witnesses, and in-depth research into an organization’s national hazing history.
2. Identifying All Liable Parties: Unlike simple personal injury cases, hazing often involves a web of responsible entities: the individual perpetrators, the local chapter, the national organization, and often the university. Our strategy focuses on identifying all potential defendants to maximize recovery. Attorney911’s “Insurance insider advantage” (through Lupe Peña, a former insurance defense attorney) is critical here, as we know how national fraternities and universities, with their large insurance policies, try to avoid accountability and deny claims.
3. Proving Foreseeability and Pattern of Conduct: Central to hazing cases is demonstrating that the harm was foreseeable. We achieve this by uncovering a defendant’s past: previous hazing incidents, warnings received, failure to enforce policies, etc. This shows a pattern of misconduct, making it harder for defendants to claim ignorance.
4. Navigating Complex Defenses: Defendants will deploy a range of legal defenses (e.g., “consent,” “off-campus incident,” “rogue members,” sovereign immunity for public universities). We are prepared to systematically dismantle these defenses, emphasizing that consent under duress is invalid, that duty extends beyond campus boundaries, and that organizations cannot simply claim ignorance when patterns of hazing exist. Our deep knowledge of Texas law ensures we leverage all exceptions to sovereign immunity where applicable.
5. Focusing on Accountability and Reform: While compensation for victims is paramount, we also understand that many families desire accountability and institutional change. Our litigation aims to achieve settlements or verdicts that not only compensate the victim but also compel organizations and universities to implement meaningful anti-hazing reforms, potentially preventing future tragedies.

For Louisiana families, facing a hazing incident in Texas can feel overwhelming. But with a strategic and aggressive legal approach that understands the nuances of hazing and the defenses involved, justice and accountability are achievable.

Practical Guides & FAQs

When hazing strikes, families and students are often thrust into a chaotic world of fear, confusion, and legal complexities. Knowing what to do, what to look for, and when to seek help is crucial. This practical guide for Louisiana families and students aims to provide actionable advice in these critical moments.

8.1 For Parents: Navigating Hazing Allegations from Louisiana to Texas

For Louisiana parents, the distance to a Texas university can make detecting and responding to hazing even more challenging. Vigilance and informed action are your best defenses.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be attuned to changes in your child that could indicate hazing.

  • Physical Signs: Unexplained bruises, burns, cuts, or repeated “accidents.” Extreme fatigue, dramatic weight changes, or obvious sleep deprivation. If your child makes excuses that don’t quite add up, pay attention.
  • Behavioral & Emotional Changes: Sudden secrecy about organizational activities, withdrawal from family or old friends, dramatic shifts in mood (anxiety, depression, irritability). They may seem constantly stressed, jumpy when their phone pings, or become defensive when asked about their group.
  • Academic Red Flags: A sudden drop in grades, missed classes, or academic performance issues due to “mandatory” group events.
  • Digital Obsession: Constant checking of phone for group chat updates, anxiety about responding immediately, or obsessive deletion of messages/browsing history.

• How to Talk to Your Child: Approach the conversation with empathy, not judgment.

  • Ask open-ended questions: “How are things going with [group name]? Are you truly enjoying it?” “What do they ask you to do as a new member?”
  • Reassure them: Emphasize their safety and well-being above their membership in any organization. Reinforce that you support them regardless of their choices and that they can talk to you without fear of judgment.
  • “Is there anything that makes you uncomfortable or that you wish you didn’t have to do?” “Would the university or I approve if we knew exactly what was happening?”

• If Your Child is Hurt: Prioritize their health and safety.

  • Seek Medical Care: Get them to an emergency room or urgent care immediately. Ensure medical staff are explicitly told that injuries are hazing-related for accurate documentation.
  • Document Everything (Louisiana-to-Texas Distance): This is even more critical when you’re not physically present. Instruct your child to start documenting. Take photos of injuries (multiple angles, good lighting, maybe a common object for scale). Screenshot ALL relevant digital communications (group chats, texts, social media posts). Write down everything your child tells you, with dates and times. Send screenshots to yourself for backup.

• Dealing with the University:

  • Document Communications: Keep meticulous records of every interaction with university officials, including names, titles, dates, times, and summaries of conversations.
  • Ask Direct Questions: Inquire about specific university protocols, prior incidents involving the organization, and what exact steps the university will take to ensure your child’s safety and address the hazing.
  • Do NOT expect Confidentiality from University: Understand that internal university investigations are not private in the same way an attorney-client relationship is. Information shared with the university may not remain confidential.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: Consult an experienced attorney from Attorney911 immediately if:

  • Your child has suffered significant physical or psychological harm.
  • You feel the university or organization is minimizing the incident, attempting a cover-up, or pressuring your child into silence.
  • You are unsure of your rights or your child’s rights.

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

If you are a student from Louisiana at a Texas university, currently experiencing or witnessing hazing, remember that you have rights and options, and your well-being comes first.

• Is This Hazing or Just “Tradition”? Ask yourself these questions:

  • Am I being forced or pressured to do something I genuinely don’t want to do?
  • Would the university or my parents approve of this activity?
  • Does this activity make me feel unsafe, humiliated, or degraded?
  • Am I being told to keep secrets or lie about what’s happening?
  • Am I being required to participate in activities that interfere with my academics, sleep, or personal safety?
    If you answered YES to any of these, it is very likely hazing, regardless of what others might call it.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Despite what some members might claim, in the eyes of Texas law and ethical standards, your “agreement” to participate in hazing is often not true consent. The power dynamics, immense pressure to fit in, and fear of social exclusion or retribution mean that any “consent” given is coerced and therefore invalid. You cannot legally consent to be hazed.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely:

  • Prioritize Safety: If you are in immediate danger, call 911. Most Texas universities and state laws have “Good Samaritan” clauses, meaning you won’t be penalized for seeking medical help in an emergency, even if underage drinking was involved.
  • Communicate with Trusted Adults: Inform a parent, trusted family member in Louisiana, a university RA, or a non-involved friend about your desire to leave or your safety concerns.
  • Withdraw Clearly (and in Writing): If you decide to de-pledge or resign, do so in writing (email or text) to the chapter president and/or new member educator. Keep a copy. Avoid “one last meeting” where you might be pressured or intimidated.
  • Report Confidentially/Anonymously:
    • Campus Resources: Dean of Students Office, Student Conduct, university police (e.g., UHPD, TAMUPD, UTPD, SMUPD, BPD).
    • Anonymous Reporting: Many universities offer anonymous online forms.
    • National Anti-Hazing Hotline: Call 1-888-NOT-HAZE (1-888-668-4293), available 24/7.
    • Legal Counsel: Contact Attorney911 for a confidential discussion of your rights and options.

• Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: Texas has laws designed to encourage reporting. If you, in good faith, seek help for a hazing or alcohol-related medical emergency, you may be immune from certain civil or criminal liabilities. This means your safety, or a friend’s, comes first.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you were once involved in hazing, or witnessed it, and now regret your participation or silence, your courage in coming forward can prevent future harm and provide justice for victims.

• Your Testimony Matters: Your insider knowledge and testimony can be invaluable evidence to expose hazing, lead to accountability for perpetrators, and ultimately save lives.
• Navigate Your Own Legal Situation: If you participated in hazing, you might have your own legal exposure. It is crucial to seek independent legal advice from an attorney to understand your rights and potential liabilities. Cooperating with authorities or legal teams can sometimes mitigate your criminal or civil exposure, but you should not do so without consulting your own lawyer first.
• Anonymity vs. Direct Cooperation: You may be able to provide information anonymously, but often, direct, sworn testimony is needed for civil cases. An attorney can advise you on the best way to come forward, potentially protecting your identity until it becomes legally necessary. Attorney911 can help you understand these complex issues through a confidential consultation.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For Louisiana families, navigating a hazing incident in Texas is a high-stakes endeavor. Mistakes in the initial hours and days can severely jeopardize your ability to seek justice. Attorney911’s video, “Client Mistakes That Can Ruin Your Injury Case” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3IYsoxOSxY), outlines common pitfalls. Always proceed with caution.

MISTAKES THAT CAN RUIN YOUR HAZING CASE:

1. Letting Your Child Delete Messages or “Clean Up” Evidence:
   • What families think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble or damage their future.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Digital evidence, particularly group chats, is the most crucial component of modern hazing cases. Deleting it is not only an attempt at a cover-up but can be construed as obstruction of justice and makes building a strong case nearly impossible. Defense attorneys will capitalize on any missing information.
   • What to do instead: Preserve EVERYTHING immediately, even embarrassing or seemingly minor content. Screenshots, photos, and videos should be saved without alteration.
2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly:
   • What families think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
   • Why it’s wrong: The organization will immediately “go dark,” lawyer up, instruct members to deny everything, delete evidence, coach witnesses, and prepare their defenses. This effectively seals off crucial information and can provoke retaliation.
   • What to do instead: Document everything in secret. Then, call Attorney911, and let us handle all communication with the organization and its representatives.
3. Signing University “Release” or “Resolution” Forms Without Legal Review:
   • What universities do: They often pressure families to sign waivers, non-disclosure agreements, or “internal resolution” agreements to quickly close an incident.
   • Why it’s wrong: You may inadvertently waive your child’s right to sue, forever closing off avenues for full compensation and accountability. These administrative settlements are almost always far below the true value of your child’s damages.
   • What to do instead: Do NOT sign any document from the university, an organization, or an insurance company without having an attorney review 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: Anything posted publicly can be used against you or your child by defense attorneys. Inconsistencies or emotional details can undermine credibility, and such posts can inadvertently waive legal privileges.
   • What to do instead: Document everything privately and share it only with your attorney. Allow your legal counsel to advise on any public statements or media engagement.
5. Letting Your Child Go Back to “One Last Meeting” or “Talk it Out”:
   • What fraternities say: “Come talk to us before you do anything drastic; let’s resolve this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: These “talks” are often designed to pressure the victim, extract statements that later harm their case, minimize the incident, or gain intelligence on the family’s intentions.
   • What to do instead: Once you’re considering legal action, all communication from the organization should be directed through your attorney.
6. Waiting “to See How the University Handles It”:
   • What universities promise: “We’re investigating this thoroughly; let us handle this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: University administrative processes are designed to protect the institution. Evidence disappears rapidly, key witnesses graduate or are coached, and the statute of limitations runs. University discipline rarely offers significant compensation for severe injuries.
   • What to do instead: Preserve evidence NOW. Consult a lawyer immediately to understand options beyond administrative discipline. University processes and legal accountability are separate tracks.
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, representing the defendant organizations, are trained to minimize payouts. Any recorded statement you give can be used against you, and early settlement offers are almost always lowball.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with them and state, “My attorney will contact you regarding this matter.”

8.5 Short FAQ on Texas Hazing Law

“Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities in Texas (like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin) have some sovereign immunity protections, but exceptions exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, and specific federal claims like Title IX violations. Private universities (like SMU and Baylor) generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case is unique and depends on specific facts; contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

“Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
It can be. Texas law classifies hazing as a Class B misdemeanor by default. However, it becomes a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who fail to report hazing or retaliate against those who do can also face criminal charges.

“Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation activities?”
Yes. Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts and juries recognize that “agreement” under intense peer pressure, a power imbalance within a group, and fear of social exclusion or retribution is not true voluntary consent.

“How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”
Generally, the statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death claims in Texas is two years from the date of injury or death. However, the “discovery rule” may extend this period if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known. In cases involving cover-ups or fraud, the statute may be tolled (paused). Time is critical in hazing cases because evidence disappears rapidly. Call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to protect your legal rights. For more information on this, you can watch our video on the Statute of Limitations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRHwg8tV02c.

“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, knowledge, or control over student organizations, and the foreseeability of harm. Many major hazing cases nationally (such as the Michael Deng death at a remote retreat, or the Collin Wiant death at an “unofficial” off-campus house) occurred off-campus and still resulted in multi-million-dollar judgments against responsible parties.

“Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
Many hazing cases are resolved through confidential settlements negotiated outside of court, which means details are not made public. While criminal proceedings are public, civil cases can often be settled with agreements to protect the victim’s privacy. We prioritize your family’s privacy while pursuing accountability.

Safe Alternatives to Greek Life in Louisiana and Texas

For students in Louisiana and Texas seeking meaningful campus connections without hazing risks, there are many fulfilling alternatives to traditional Greek life. These groups often offer strong communities, leadership opportunities, and social engagement without the dangerous pressure.

Campus Organizations (Hazing-Free Alternatives)

• Student Government/Leadership Organizations: Roles in student government, campus programming boards, or resident advisor programs offer leadership development and significant influence without hazing.
• Academic Honor Societies: Legitimate honor societies (e.g., Phi Beta Kappa, Golden Key, discipline-specific societies) focus on academic achievement and do NOT engage in hazing.
• Career-Focused Groups: Pre-law, pre-med, business, engineering, or journalism clubs provide invaluable networking and professional development.
• Community Service/Social Justice Groups: Organizations like Circle K, Habitat for Humanity campus chapters, or various environmental and advocacy groups offer profound impact and camaraderie.
• Religious/Spiritual Groups: Campus ministry organizations, interfaith councils, or groups like Hillel and the Newman Center provide strong community and support.
• Cultural Organizations: Black Student Unions, Hispanic Student Associations, Asian cultural groups, and international student associations foster identity and community.
• Club Sports & Intramural Athletics: These offer teamwork, physical activity, and social connections in a low-pressure, often hazing-free, environment.
• Performing Arts Groups: Theater, dance, chorus, or band groups can provide creative outlets and close bonds.

Social Alternatives

• Residence hall communities and programming
• Academic study groups and tutoring programs
• Part-time campus employment
• Research assistant positions
• Volunteer opportunities (local food banks, tutoring programs)
• Campus recreation programs (yoga, fitness classes)

What to Look for in ANY Organization

Before joining any group, students should verify:

• ☑️ Clear written anti-hazing policy, readily available and discussed openly.
• ☑️ Faculty or staff advisor actively involved and present at key events.
• ☑️ Transparent membership process with no “secret” phases or unknown events.
• ☑️ No “pledging” period with undisclosed activities or significant time commitments that interfere with academics or sleep.
• ☑️ Current members willing to discuss their experiences honestly and openly, without evasion.
• ☑️ Strong emphasis on mutual respect, consent, and safety in all activities.

Red Flags to Avoid

• 🚩 “What happens here stays here” or “don’t ask, don’t tell” culture.
• 🚩 Excessive time demands that affect academics, sleep, or personal health.
• 🚩 Required alcohol consumption or drug use at any event.
• 🚩 Vague descriptions of “new member education” or “initiation.”
• 🚩 Expectations of sleep deprivation, extreme physical exertion, or demeaning tasks.
• 🚩 Unexplained financial demands beyond standard transparent dues.
• 🚩 Secrecy from parents, university officials, or other non-members.

About The Manginello Law Firm + Call to Action

When your family faces a hazing case at a Texas university, you need more than a general personal injury lawyer. You need attorneys who intimately understand how powerful institutions fight back—and, crucially, how to overcome those defenses to achieve justice. The Manginello Law Firm, operating as Attorney911, brings unparalleled experience and unique qualifications to the complex world of hazing litigation.

Our Unique Qualifications for Hazing Cases:

• Insurance Insider Advantage (Lupe Peña): Our Associate Attorney Lupe Peña is a former insurance defense attorney for a national firm. She knows their playbook because she used to run it. This means we understand exactly how fraternity and university insurance companies value (and undervalue) hazing claims, their delay tactics, coverage exclusion arguments, and settlement strategies. This insider knowledge gives our clients a decisive edge.
• Complex Litigation Against Massive Institutions (Ralph Manginello): Ralph Manginello, our Managing Partner, is no stranger to taking on formidable defendants. Our firm was one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation—a complex, multi-party legal battle against a billion-dollar corporation. Our extensive federal court experience (including the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas) means we are not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their well-funded defense teams. We’ve taken on billion-dollar corporations and won; we know how to fight powerful defendants.
• Multi-Million Dollar Wrongful Death & Catastrophic Injury Experience: Hazing and campus abuse often result in catastrophic injuries or wrongful death. Attorney911 has a proven track record of securing multi-million dollar results for families in these devastating cases. We collaborate with economists to accurately value lifetime care needs for brain injury and permanent disability cases, ensuring our clients receive full and fair compensation. We don’t settle cheap. We meticulously build strong cases that demand true accountability.
• Criminal + Civil Hazing Expertise: Our firm possesses a unique dual capability in both criminal defense and civil litigation. Ralph Manginello’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) underscores our understanding of how criminal hazing charges interact with civil lawsuits. We can advise victims, witnesses, and former members on both their criminal exposure and civil rights, ensuring a comprehensive legal strategy.
• Investigative Depth: Successfully litigating hazing cases requires more than just legal knowledge; it demands tenacious investigation. We leverage a network of experts—medical professionals, digital forensics specialists, economists, and psychologists—to build rock-solid cases. We meticulously obtain hidden evidence, including deleted group chats, internal chapter records, and university documents, leaving no stone unturned. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

We understand that hazing at Texas universities affects families in Louisiana and across the region, causing immeasurable pain and suffering. From our Houston office and through our presence in Austin and Beaumont, we serve families throughout Texas, including Louisiana and surrounding areas. We approach each case with empathy, recognizing the profound trauma hazing inflicts, while relentlessly pursuing justice and accountability for victims.

Call to Action for Louisiana Families

If your child from Louisiana has experienced hazing at any Texas campus – be it the University of Houston, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, Baylor, or any other institution – we want to hear from you. Families in Louisiana and throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers, accountability, and fair compensation. You don’t have to face this alone.

Contact The Manginello Law Firm for a confidential, no-obligation consultation. We will listen to what happened without judgment, explain your legal options under Texas law, and help you decide on the best path forward for your family. There is no pressure to hire us on the spot; our priority is to empower you with information.

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We will listen to your story with empathy and understanding.
• We will review any evidence you have, such as photos, texts, or medical records.
• We will explain your legal options, including criminal reporting, civil lawsuits, or both.
• We will discuss realistic timelines and what to expect throughout the legal process.
• We will answer all your questions about costs and assure you that we work on a contingency fee basis – we don’t get paid unless we win your case.

Contact Attorney911 Today:

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

Spanish-language services:

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

Whether you’re in Louisiana, or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to face this devastating challenge alone. Call Attorney911 today.

Legal Disclaimer

This article is provided for informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC.

Hazing laws, university policies, and legal precedents can change. The information in this guide is current as of late 2025 but may not reflect the most recent developments. Every hazing case is unique, and outcomes depend on the specific facts, evidence, applicable law, and many other factors.

If you or your child has been affected by hazing, we strongly encourage you to consult with a qualified Texas attorney who can review your specific situation, explain your legal rights, and advise you on the best course of action for your family.

The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC / Attorney911
Houston, Austin, and Beaumont, Texas
Call: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
Direct: (713) 528-9070 | Cell: (713) 443-4781
Website: https://attorney911.com
Email: ralph@atty911.com