Throckmorton County, a place with a rich history and strong community ties, is where our legal expertise in fraternity and sorority hazing cases truly makes a difference. Our Throckmorton County Fraternity & Sorority Hazing Lawyers, including University Hazing Injury & Wrongful Death Attorneys, are ready to assist. Attorney911 — Legal Emergency Lawyers™, led by a former insurance defense attorney, understands fraternity insurance tactics. With federal court experience against national fraternities and universities, and a track record in BP Explosion litigation, we fearlessly confront massive institutions. Our HCCLA Criminal Defense + Civil Wrongful Death expertise and multi-million dollar proven results speak volumes. We handle hazing cases at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, specializing in evidence preservation. With 25+ years of experience, we offer a free consultation and contingency fee (“No Win, No Fee”). Hablamos Español. Call 1-888-ATTY-911.

Imagine a young man or woman from Throckmorton County, full of dreams and potential, heading off to one of Texas’s renowned universities—perhaps Texas A&M, UT Austin, or a school closer to Houston like UH. They embrace college life, eager to find their community, and decide to join a fraternity, sorority, or another student organization. What begins as an exciting journey of new friendships and shared experiences can, for some, quickly twist into something dark and dangerous. They might find themselves in an off-campus house late at night, surrounded by older members, being pressured to drink far beyond their limits, enduring humiliating rituals, or participating in physically dangerous “traditions.” Others laugh and chant, while some film the events on their phones, all under an unspoken code of secrecy. When someone inevitably gets hurt—collapsing from intoxication, suffering a physical injury, or having a panic attack—fear takes over. No one wants to call 911 because they’re afraid of “getting the chapter shut down” or “getting in trouble” with the university. The student from Throckmorton County, once so hopeful, now feels trapped, torn between a desperate need for acceptance and their own well-being.

This scenario isn’t a fictional tale; it’s a stark reality playing out on campuses across Texas and the nation. Even here in Throckmorton County, families send their children off to college with hopes for their future, unaware of the hidden dangers that can lurk within campus organizations. Whether your child attends Texas A&M in College Station, the University of Texas in Austin, or another institution across our state, they could encounter the pervasive and often secretive world of hazing.

This comprehensive guide aims to shed light on hazing and the law in Texas for families in Throckmorton County and beyond. We will explore what modern hazing truly looks like in 2025, moving past outdated stereotypes to expose its current forms, including the insidious role of digital coercion. We will then delve into the Texas and federal legal frameworks designed to combat hazing, outlining the rights of victims and the responsibilities of institutions. Drawing lessons from major national cases, we will connect these precedents to the realities on the ground at the University of Houston (UH), Texas A&M, UT Austin, Southern Methodist University (SMU), and Baylor, as well as their associated fraternities and sororities. Our goal is to empower you with knowledge, showing you what legal options victims and families in Throckmorton County, Houston, and throughout Texas may have.

This article offers general information for educational purposes and should not be considered specific legal advice. While we illuminate common patterns and legal pathways, the facts of each case are unique. The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, stands ready to evaluate individual cases based on their specific facts, serving families throughout Texas, including those in Throckmorton County.

IMMEDIATE HELP FOR HAZING EMERGENCIES:

• If your child is in immediate danger RIGHT NOW:

  • Call 911 for medical emergencies. Prioritize their health and safety above all else.
  • Then call Attorney911: 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911). We provide immediate guidance because we are the Legal Emergency Lawyers™.

• In the critical first 48 hours following an incident:

  • Medical attention first: If your child is injured, intoxicated, or experiencing severe distress, get them to an emergency room or seek medical help, even if they insist they are “fine.” Their health comes first.
  • Preserve evidence BEFORE it disappears:
    • Immediately screenshot all group chats, texts, and DMs relating to the incident. Digital evidence can vanish quickly.
    • Photograph any injuries from multiple angles, and continue to do so over several days to document their progression.
    • Save any physical items that could be evidence, such as clothing worn during the hazing, receipts for forced purchases, or unusual objects.
  • Document everything: Write down every detail while it’s fresh in your mind—who, what, when, where, and what was said. Contemporaneous notes are powerful.
  • Crucially, do NOT:
    • Confront the fraternity/sorority directly. This can lead to evidence destruction or retaliation.
    • Sign anything from the university or an insurance company without consulting legal counsel. You could waive vital rights.
    • Post details on public social media. This can compromise your child’s privacy and the legal case.
    • Allow your child to delete messages or “clean up” evidence. This can be seen as obstruction.

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

  • Evidence disappears incredibly quickly, particularly digital communications that are often the backbone of a hazing case.
  • Universities and organizations move swiftly to control the narrative following any incident.
  • Our team can help you legally preserve crucial evidence and protect your child’s rights from the outset.
  • Call 1-888-ATTY-911 for an immediate, confidential consultation.

2. HAZING IN 2025: WHAT IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE

For Throckmorton County families unfamiliar with modern Greek life or collegiate organizations, hazing is often imagined as a harmless prank—a relic of movies from decades past. However, the reality in 2025 is far more sinister. Hazing is a pervasive, dangerous, and often sophisticated form of abuse that inflicts significant physical, mental, and emotional harm. It’s no longer confined to secret basements; it has evolved to leverage digital tools, psychological manipulation, and a culture of silence that transcends traditional boundaries.

At its core, hazing refers to any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students. Crucially, this act must endanger the mental or physical health or safety of the student. It’s important to emphasize that an individual’s “agreement” to participate does not automatically make the activity lawful or safe, especially when influenced by peer pressure, power imbalances, and the intense desire for belonging.

2.1 Clear, Modern Definition of Hazing

Hazing, in its contemporary form, is not merely a mischievous ritual. It is a systematic process of degradation, manipulation, and physical or psychological abuse that thrives on secrecy and a distorted sense of tradition. When an individual is forced, coerced, or strongly pressured to engage in behaviors that endanger their physical or mental health, humiliate them, or exploit them, it falls under the umbrella of hazing. The key element is often the power dynamic: older or established members exerting control over new or prospective members who feel they cannot refuse without facing social exclusion or retaliation.

The phrase “I agreed to it” often comes up in hazing discussions. However, under the intense social pressure of pledging or initiation, especially in a group where belonging feels paramount, “consent” can be meaningless. The law, and our understanding of human behavior, recognizes that an individual subjected to a power imbalance cannot truly consent to dangerous or dehumanizing acts. The fear of being ostracized, losing social standing, or failing to “make the cut” can be as coercive as outright physical threats. Hazing laws specifically address this to protect individuals from these exploitative dynamics.

2.2 Main Categories of Hazing

Hazing tactics are diverse and constantly adapting to avoid detection. They range from overt physical violence to subtle, insidious psychological manipulation. Based on expert frameworks, hazing can be categorized into escalating tiers, but any form is damaging and unacceptable.

• Alcohol and Substance Hazing: This remains the single most common and deadly form of hazing. Pledges or new members are often forced or coerced into consuming dangerous quantities of alcohol. This can take many forms:

  • Chugging challenges, “lineups,” or “waterfalls” where members are required to rapidly consume large amounts of alcohol.
  • “Big/Little” or “family tree” events that disproportionately target new members with hard liquor.
  • Drinking games designed to ensure extreme intoxication if answers are incorrect or tasks are failed.
  • Pressure to consume unknown substances or engage in drug use as part of an initiation rite.
  • These activities often lead to critical medical emergencies, including alcohol poisoning, internal organ damage, and traumatic falls.

• Physical Hazing: These acts often involve direct bodily harm or extreme physical endurance designed to “break” the new members.

  • Paddling and beatings: Deliberate physical assaults, sometimes with designated instruments, causing bruises, cuts, or internal injuries.
  • Extreme calisthenics, “workouts,” or “smokings”: Forced, prolonged physical exertion far beyond safe limits, often without proper rest or hydration, leading to rhabdomyolysis or collapse.
  • Sleep deprivation: Requiring new members to stay awake for extended periods, often through late-night “meetings” or tasks, leading to exhaustion, impaired judgment, and accidents.
  • Food/water deprivation or forced consumption: Withholding essential sustenance or forcing individuals to eat or drink unpleasant, spoiled, or nauseating substances.
  • Exposure to extreme environments: Leaving individuals in freezing temperatures, scorching heat, or otherwise dangerous conditions without adequate protection or sustenance.

• Sexualized and Humiliating Hazing: These forms of hazing are deeply degrading and can inflict severe psychological trauma.

  • Forced nudity or partial nudity: Requiring new members to strip or perform acts unclothed.
  • Simulated sexual acts: Forcing individuals to participate in or observe mock sexual behaviors, such as “elephant walks” or “roasted pig” positions.
  • Degrading costumes: Requiring new members to wear embarrassing or demeaning outfits in public.
  • Acts with racist, sexist, homophobic, or transphobic overtones: The use of slurs, forced role-playing of stereotypes, or other behaviors that target identity groups. These often compound psychological harm with discrimination.

• Psychological Hazing: While some mistakenly believe this is “harmless,” psychological hazing can cause profound and lasting mental health issues.

  • Verbal abuse and threats: Constant yelling, insults, derogatory names, and explicit or implicit threats of physical harm, social exclusion, or academic failure.
  • Isolation: Forcing new members to cut off contact with non-members, family, or existing friends, creating an unhealthy dependency on the group.
  • Manipulative games or forced confessions: Coercing individuals to reveal personal secrets or participate in setups designed to exploit their vulnerabilities.
  • Public shaming: Forcing embarrassing acts in public or using social media to degrade new members.
  • Fear and intimidation: Creating an environment where new members constantly fear reprisal or failure.

• Digital/Online Hazing: With the ubiquity of smartphones and social media, hazing has moved into the digital realm, allowing for 24/7 control and surveillance.

  • Group chat dares, “challenges,” and public humiliation: Using platforms like GroupMe, Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok, or Discord to issue commands, mandate participation in demeaning acts, or publicly shame new members.
  • Pressure to create or share compromising images/videos: Coercing individuals to film themselves performing embarrassing acts or to distribute sensitive content.
  • Constant digital surveillance: Requiring pledges to respond instantly to messages at all hours, track their location via apps like Find My Friends, or have their social media activity closely monitored and controlled by older members.
  • Digital evidence destruction: A critical element of modern digital hazing is also the rapid deletion of messages, photos, and videos to cover tracks, making timely intervention and evidence preservation vital.

2.3 Where Hazing Actually Happens

Hazing is not just a “frat boy” problem; it infiltrates a wide array of campus organizations. It can occur anywhere that groups wield power over new or aspiring members.

• Fraternities and Sororities: This includes social Greek letter organizations across all councils—Interfraternity Council (IFC), Panhellenic Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC), and multicultural Greek councils. While many chapters strive to be positive organizations, the reality is that a significant number continue to engage in hazing practices.
• Corps of Cadets/ROTC/Military-Style Groups: At institutions like Texas A&M, the esteemed traditions of the Corps can sometimes be corrupted by hazing masquerading as “discipline” or “character building,” leading to physical and psychological abuse.
• Spirit Squads, Tradition Clubs, and Student Organizations: Groups like “Absolute Texxas” at UT Austin or similar spirit and tradition organizations often face hazing allegations involving rituals considered integral to their identity. Some clubs, even academic or service-oriented ones, can foster environments where hazing takes root.
• Athletic Teams: From football and basketball to swimming, cheerleading, and band, hazing can occur within collegiate athletic programs. This may involve forced physical activities outside of official training, public humiliation, or social isolation. For example, the Northwestern University scandal highlighted deeply entrenched hazing in a high-profile athletic program.
• Marching Bands and Performance Groups: Even seemingly innocuous groups can fall prey to hazing, as tragically underscored by the Robert Champion case at Florida A&M University’s marching band.
• Some Service, Cultural, and Academic Organizations: While less common than in social Greek life or athletics, any group with a hierarchical structure and a desire for “unity” can potentially engage in hazing under the guise of team building.

The persistence of hazing is often rooted in a combination of factors: an undue emphasis on social status, the allure of “tradition,” the desire for group solidarity, and a deeply ingrained culture of secrecy. New members are often told that only by enduring the hazing can they truly belong, and that only through shared suffering can bonds be forged. This psychological manipulation, coupled with explicit or implicit threats of social exclusion or physical harm, keeps these dangerous practices alive, even when everyone “knows” hazing is illegal and explicitly prohibited by universities.

3. LAW & LIABILITY FRAMEWORK (TEXAS + FEDERAL)

For families in Throckmorton County, understanding the legal framework surrounding hazing is crucial, especially when their children attend universities across Texas. Texas law provides robust, though continuously evolving, protections against hazing. This framework involves both criminal and civil statutes, with overlapping federal regulations that strengthen the hand of victims and prosecutors.

3.1 Texas Hazing Law Basics (Education Code)

Texas has specific, broad provisions against hazing embedded in the Texas Education Code, primarily Chapter 37, Subchapter F. These laws make it clear that hazing is not merely a university policy violation, but a serious crime with real consequences.

The law defines hazing as any intentional, knowing, or reckless act, on or off campus, by one person alone or with others, directed against a student. For an act to be considered hazing under the statute, it must fulfill two key conditions:

1. It endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student. This can include physical suffering from forced calisthenics, alcohol poisoning from coerced drinking, or severe emotional distress from humiliation and isolation.
2. It occurs for the purpose of pledging, initiation into, affiliation with, holding office in, or maintaining membership in any organization whose members include students. This clearly targets fraternities, sororities, athletic teams, clubs, and any group that requires members to “earn” their place.

Crucially, the law explicitly states that “consent” is not a defense (Texas Education Code § 37.155). Even if the victim appears to agree, or even says “I want to do this,” the law recognizes that true voluntary consent cannot be given for acts that endanger mental or physical health or safety, especially under duress or power imbalance. This provision is vital for protecting young people caught in coercive environments.

Criminal Penalties (Texas Education Code § 37.152):
The severity of criminal charges for hazing in Texas can vary:

• Class B Misdemeanor: This is the default classification for hazing. Convictions can result in up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.
• Class A Misdemeanor: If the hazing causes specific types of injuries that require medical treatment, the charge can be elevated.
• State Jail Felony: If hazing causes serious bodily injury (meaning an injury that creates a substantial risk of death or causes serious permanent disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ) or death, the offense becomes a state jail felony. This can carry a sentence ranging from 180 days to two years in a state jail, along with fines.

Beyond direct participation, the law also targets those who fail to act:

• Failing to Report Hazing: Individuals who are aware of hazing activities and fail to report them can also face criminal charges, typically a misdemeanor.
• Retaliating Against a Reporter: Any act of retaliation against someone who reports hazing is also a misdemeanor offense, designed to protect whistleblowers.

Furthermore, organizations themselves can be held criminally liable (Texas Education Code § 37.153). If an organization authorized or encouraged hazing, or if an officer or member acting in an official capacity knew about hazing and failed to report it, the organization can be fined up to $10,000 per violation. This also gives universities the power to revoke recognition and ban the errant organization from campus.

To encourage reporting, Texas law offers immunity for good-faith reporting (Texas Education Code § 37.154). A person who genuinely reports a hazing incident to university authorities or law enforcement is immune from civil or criminal liability stemming from that report. This protection aims to reduce fear for bystanders and victims who might otherwise hesitate to come forward. Moreover, in medical emergencies, Texas law and many university policies provide amnesty for students who call 911 (good-faith reporter protections), even if they were underage drinking or otherwise involved in the situation that led to the emergency.

This summary provides a foundational understanding of the Texas hazing statutes; the actual law is more technical and detailed in the Education Code itself.

3.2 Criminal vs. Civil Cases

When hazing occurs, multiple legal avenues may open, often simultaneously. It’s crucial for families from Throckmorton County to understand the distinction between criminal and civil cases:

• Criminal Cases: These are brought by the state (through a local district attorney or prosecutor) against individuals or organizations accused of violating criminal statutes. The primary aim of a criminal case is to punish wrongdoers for their illegal acts. Outcomes can include jail sentences, prison time, fines, probation, or community service. In hazing contexts, typical criminal charges can range from misdemeanor hazing offenses, furnishing alcohol to minors, assault, battery, sexual assault, to more serious charges like negligent homicide or manslaughter in fatal cases. For example, in the Max Gruver case at LSU, individuals faced negligent homicide charges.

• Civil Cases: These are brought by the victims or their surviving family members (plaintiffs) against the individuals and entities they believe are responsible for their harm (defendants). The primary aim of a civil case is to provide monetary compensation (damages) to the victim for their losses and to hold responsible parties (individuals, local and national organizations, universities) accountable. Civil claims often focus on legal theories such as:

  • Negligence and Gross Negligence: Failing to act with reasonable care, or acting with conscious indifference to the safety of others.
  • Wrongful Death: When a person’s death is caused by the negligent or wrongful act of another.
  • Negligent Hiring/Supervision: When an organization fails to properly vet or oversee its members or employees.
  • Premises Liability: When property owners fail to maintain a safe environment.
  • Emotional Distress: Compensation for severe psychological suffering.

A critical point for families to grasp is that a criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil case. The burden of proof is lower in civil court (preponderance of the evidence) than in criminal court (beyond a reasonable doubt). This means that even if criminal charges are not filed or do not result in a conviction, a civil lawsuit can still proceed and succeed. Both types of cases can also run in parallel, and attorneys who excel at both the criminal and civil sides are invaluable assets in hazing litigation.

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

Beyond state laws, federal regulations also play a significant role in combating hazing and compelling institutional accountability, particularly for federally funded educational institutions.

• Stop Campus Hazing Act (2024): This landmark federal legislation, signed into law in late 2024, is designed to bring greater transparency and accountability to hazing on college campuses. It requires institutions of higher education that receive federal funding to publicly report hazing incidents in a manner similar to how they report other campus crimes under the Clery Act. By around 2026, colleges will need to:

  • Maintain and publicly share a record of all hazing violations, along with sanctions imposed.
  • Strengthen hazing education and prevention training for students, faculty, and staff.
  • Provide clear definitions of hazing and reporting procedures.
    This act means that universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin will be federally mandated to be more transparent about hazing, making it easier for Throckmorton County families and the public to discern which organizations have a history of misconduct.

• Title IX: This federal civil rights law prohibits sex-based discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. When hazing involves sexual harassment, sexual assault, gender-based hostility, or targeted abuse based on gender identity, it falls under the purview of Title IX. Universities have an obligation to investigate and address such incidents promptly and equitably. A Title IX complaint can trigger a separate university investigation and potentially lead to institutional sanctions against individuals or organizations, in addition to any criminal or civil proceedings.

• The Clery Act (Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act): This federal law requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crime on and around their campuses. While hazing itself isn’t a specific crime category under Clery, hazing incidents often overlap with specific Clery-reportable crimes, such as:

  • Aggravated assault or simple assault.
  • Alcohol or drug law violations.
  • Sex offenses.
    When hazing involves these elements, universities must include them in their annual security reports, providing another layer of institutional transparency about campus safety issues. This data can be crucial for establishing pattern evidence in civil lawsuits.

These federal statutes work in concert with Texas state law to create a more comprehensive legal landscape for addressing hazing, strengthening the ability of victims and their advocates to seek justice and accountability from negligent institutions and organizations.

3.4 Who Can Be Liable in a Civil Hazing Lawsuit

One of the complexities of hazing litigation lies in identifying all potentially responsible parties. A thoroughly investigated hazing case can cast a wide net, holding multiple individuals and entities accountable. For families in Throckmorton County, understanding who can be held liable is key to seeking comprehensive justice. The Manginello Law Firm meticulously identifies all parties who may bear responsibility in a hazing incident:

• Individual Students: These are the members who directly planned, organized, facilitated, or participated in the hazing acts. This can include individuals who supplied alcohol, coerced new members, administered physical abuse, or actively covered up the incident. Their actions, or inactions, can lead to personal liability.

• Local Chapter/Organization: The specific fraternity, sorority, club, or athletic team itself can be sued as a legal entity. This is particularly true if the hazing was endorsed by chapter leadership, reflected a pattern of behavior within the group, or if officers failed to intervene despite knowledge of the misconduct. Officers, “pledge educators,” or designated leaders can also face individual liability for their roles.

• National Fraternity/Sorority: Most Greek organizations operating on Texas campuses, including UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, are part of larger national or international bodies. These national organizations often have an overarching duty to supervise their local chapters, enforce anti-hazing policies, and provide risk management education. Liability against a national organization often hinges on:

  • What they knew or should have known: Evidence of prior hazing incidents, complaints, or warnings received by the national headquarters.
  • Failure to enforce policies: If their anti-hazing policies were merely “paper policies” without genuine enforcement.
  • Pattern evidence: If multiple chapters of the same national organization have a history of similar hazing activities, establishing a pattern of negligence.

• University or Governing Board: The educational institution itself can be a defendant. Public universities like UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin, as state entities, do enjoy some protections under sovereign immunity in Texas. However, exceptions exist, particularly when cases involve:

  • Gross Negligence or Willful Misconduct: Beyond ordinary negligence, a university’s conscious indifference to known risks.
  • Title IX Violations: Hazing that involves sex-based discrimination may waive immunity.
  • Deliberate Indifference: A university’s failure to respond adequately to known hazing that is severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive.
  • Individual Employees: Administrators, advisors, or coaches can sometimes be sued in their personal capacity, removing sovereign immunity protections.
    Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer immunity protections than public institutions, often making them more direct targets in hazing litigation.

• Third Parties: Depending on the specific circumstances of the hazing, other entities might also bear responsibility:

  • Landlords/Property Owners: If hazing occurred at a privately owned house, Airbnb, or venue, and the owner knew or should have known about dangerous activities but failed to intervene or secure the premises.
  • Alcohol Providers: Bars, stores, or individuals who illegally furnished alcohol to minors involved in the hazing may face dram shop liability or other charges.
  • Security Companies/Event Organizers: If their negligence contributed to an unsafe environment.

It is important to recognize that not every party listed above will be liable in every hazing incident. Each case is fact-specific, and a thorough investigation is required to identify all those who contributed to the harm. The Manginello Law Firm’s experience in complex litigation means we are adept at uncovering these connections and holding all responsible parties accountable.

4. NATIONAL HAZING CASE PATTERNS (ANCHOR STORIES)

The tragic reality of hazing is that history often repeats itself. Across the nation, universities, fraternities, and families have endured devastating consequences, leading to landmark legal precedents and, sometimes, legislative change. These national anchor stories are not isolated incidents; they demonstrate patterns that Texas families, including those in Throckmorton County, should understand. They reveal common hazing tactics, institutional failures, and the significant legal and financial accountability that can follow.

4.1 Alcohol Poisoning & Death Pattern

Forced or coerced alcohol consumption remains the leading cause of hazing-related fatalities. These cases often share a tragic blueprint: extreme drinking, new members desperate to belong, and a delayed or denied call for medical help due to a pervasive culture of secrecy and fear of repercussions.

• Timothy Piazza – Penn State University, Beta Theta Pi (February 2017): Timothy Piazza, a 19-year-old pledge, died after participating in a “bid acceptance” initiation night. Fraternity members forced him to consume dangerous amounts of alcohol, leading to multiple falls captured by the chapter’s security cameras. Despite his obvious distress and injuries, members delayed calling 911 for nearly 12 hours. The subsequent investigation revealed a horrific culture of callous indifference. Dozens of fraternity members faced criminal charges, including involuntary manslaughter and aggravated assault, in one of the largest hazing prosecutions in U.S. history. The Piazza family also pursued civil litigation, which resulted in confidential settlements. This tragedy led to Pennsylvania enacting the Timothy J. Piazza Anti-Hazing Law, one of the toughest in the nation, making hazing a felony and expanding the scope of those who can be held liable. The takeaway from Piazza’s case is chillingly clear: extreme intoxication, deliberate delay in calling 911, and a deeply entrenched culture of silence designed to protect the organization can be legally devastating and morally reprehensible.

• Andrew Coffey – Florida State University, Pi Kappa Phi (November 2017): Andrew Coffey, also a 20-year-old pledge, died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” event. Pledges were given handles of hard liquor and pressured to consume them rapidly. His death led to criminal charges against multiple fraternity members, most of whom pled guilty to misdemeanor hazing. Florida State University responded by temporarily suspending all Greek life and implementing comprehensive policy overhauls. This case illustrates how formulaic “tradition” drinking nights, rebranded as “brotherhood” events, are a repeating script for disaster, with fatal consequences often arising from predictable patterns of excessive alcohol consumption.

• Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University, Phi Delta Theta (September 2017): Max Gruver, a freshman, died after a “Bible study” drinking game where he was forced to answer questions about the fraternity. If he answered incorrectly, or slow enough, he was forced to chug hard alcohol. His blood alcohol content was a staggering 0.495% at the time of his death. Following his death, Louisiana enacted the Max Gruver Act, which upgraded hazing to a felony offense if it involves serious bodily injury or death, making it one of the strictest anti-hazing laws in the country. The Gruver family pursued a civil lawsuit, with one defendant’s insurer being ordered to pay a $6.1 million verdict. This case demonstrates how legislative change often directly follows public outrage and clear, undeniable proof of hazing’s destructive nature.

• Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University, Pi Kappa Alpha (March 2021): Stone Foltz, a 20-year-old pledge, was pressured to consume an entire bottle of high-proof liquor on a “Big/Little” night, a common hazing practice for Pi Kappa Alpha chapters nationwide. He died from alcohol poisoning. In the aftermath, multiple fraternity members were convicted of hazing-related criminal charges. The civil lawsuit resulted in a $10 million settlement in 2023, paid by various parties, including $7 million from the national Pi Kappa Alpha organization and nearly $3 million from Bowling Green State University itself. This case powerfully underscores that universities, even public ones, can face significant financial and reputational consequences alongside fraternities when they fail to adequately prevent hazing. It also highlighted the massive liability national organizations carry for widespread, known hazing patterns.

4.2 Physical & Ritualized Hazing Pattern

Beyond alcohol, hazing often involves brutal physical rituals and cruel tests of endurance, designed to instill fear, submission, and a false sense of loyalty.

• Chun “Michael” Deng – Baruch College, Pi Delta Psi (December 2013): Michael Deng, a freshman, died during a fraternity retreat in the Pocono Mountains. He was blindfolded, forced to wear a heavy backpack, and repeatedly tackled in a ritual called the “glass ceiling game.” Despite suffering a fatal traumatic brain injury, fraternity members delayed calling 911, attempting to cover up the incident. Multiple individuals were convicted of criminal charges, and, significantly, the national Pi Delta Psi fraternity itself was criminally convicted of aggravated assault and involuntary manslaughter, fined, and banned from Pennsylvania for a decade. This landmark case starkly illustrates that off-campus “retreats,” often chosen to evade university oversight, can be as dangerous or even more so than parties, and that national organizations bear significant direct criminal and civil liability for the actions of their chapters.

4.3 Athletic Program Hazing & Abuse

Hazing is not exclusive to Greek life. Prestigious athletic programs, with their emphasis on team hierarchies and “toughening up” new recruits, can also be fertile ground for abuse and systemic hazing.

• Northwestern University Football (2023–2025): In 2023, former Northwestern football players came forward with shocking allegations of widespread sexualized and racist hazing within the program, spanning multiple years. The incidents allegedly included forced sexual acts, racial taunts, and other degrading treatment. Multiple players filed lawsuits against Northwestern University and its coaching staff, detailing systemic abuse and a lack of institutional oversight. The scandal led to the firing of long-standing head coach Pat Fitzgerald, who subsequently filed his own wrongful-termination lawsuit against the university. The Northwestern hazing scandal sent shockwaves through collegiate athletics, unequivocally demonstrating that hazing extends far beyond Greek life into major, high-profile athletic programs and raises serious questions about institutional oversight and responsibility.

4.4 What These Cases Mean for Texas Families

These national tragedies share common, disturbing threads: forced drinking, physical or psychological torment, extreme humiliation, a deliberate delay in or denial of medical care, and concerted cover-up efforts. Time and again, these patterns, once dismissed as “boys will be boys” or “harmless traditions,” have led to irreversible harm and death.

The lessons from these cases are critically important for families in Throckmorton County. While every incident is unique, the precedents set by these high-profile cases mean that when a tragedy strikes:

• Legal accountability is possible: Juries and courts are increasingly willing to hold individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and even universities accountable for failing to prevent hazing or for enabling a culture where it thrives.
• Significant compensation can be awarded: Multi-million-dollar settlements and verdicts are not uncommon in cases involving death or catastrophic injury, reflecting the profound losses suffered by victims and their families.
• Legislative change can occur: Public outrage fueled by these cases has spurred stronger anti-hazing laws in several states, increasing criminal penalties and duties to report. The federal Stop Campus Hazing Act is a direct result of this national pattern.

Texas families facing hazing at UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, or Baylor are operating within a legal and cultural landscape profoundly shaped by these national lessons. Our firm leverages these precedents to build strong cases, ensuring that the lessons learned nationally are applied to protect Texas students.

5. TEXAS FOCUS: UH, TEXAS A&M, UT, SMU, BAYLOR

The Manginello Law Firm is deeply committed to serving families across Texas, including those in Throckmorton County, when hazing incidents impact their children at major universities. While Throckmorton County is a rural community a considerable distance from the state’s largest metropolitan areas, many families from the county send their students to these prominent Texas institutions. Whether your child is studying at Texas A&M, UT Austin, or perhaps back in Houston at the University of Houston, our firm understands the unique challenges and cultural contexts of each campus. We are a Houston-based Texas personal injury firm, and we extend our expertise to families throughout the state, ensuring that even if your child is attending a university hundreds of miles from Throckmorton County, they have access to local Texas counsel who understands the complex landscape of hazing litigation.

Here, we provide a focused look at five of Texas’s largest and most influential universities, discussing their particular hazing landscapes and how cases might proceed, offering specific insights relevant to Texas families wherever they reside.

5.1 University of Houston (UH)

The University of Houston, located in the heart of our firm’s home city, serves a diverse urban population, drawing students from Harris County and across Texas, including those who travel from Throckmorton County for their education. UH is a large public research university with a dynamic campus environment, blending commuter students with a growing residential population. Its Greek life is robust, with numerous fraternities and sororities operating under various councils, alongside a wide array of student organizations and athletic clubs.

5.1.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Throckmorton County Connection)

UH’s setting in Houston, the largest city in Texas, means its student body is a microcosm of the state’s diversity. Students from Throckmorton County, accustomed to a close-knit rural community, find themselves navigating this expansive urban campus, often seeking out student organizations, including Greek life, to build connections. The campus culture is vibrant and dynamic, with strong academic programs and an active sports scene. However, like many large universities, it also presents challenges related to student safety and conduct within its many organizations. The proximity to downtown Houston means off-campus activities can be extensive, sometimes making oversight more challenging.

5.1.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Houston maintains a strict anti-hazing policy, clearly prohibiting hazing whether it occurs on or off campus. Its policy explicitly forbids any act that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation, affiliation, or membership. This includes but is not limited to forced consumption of alcohol, food, or drugs, sleep deprivation, physical mistreatment, branding, and acts causing mental distress.

UH provides several avenues for reporting hazing:

• Dean of Students Office: Serves as the primary point of contact for student conduct and organizational violations.
• Campus Police (UHPD): For incidents involving criminal behavior or immediate threats.
• Online Reporting Forms: Anonymous or named reporting options are available through the university’s student affairs website.
• Associate Vice President for Student Affairs & Dean of Students: Oversees campus-wide student conduct and safety.

The university also publicly states its commitment to investigating and disciplining organizations and individuals found responsible for hazing.

5.1.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

While UH strives to maintain a safe campus, it has faced documented hazing incidents. One significant case involved Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) in 2016. Pledges allegedly endured severe hazing, including deprivation of food, water, and sleep during a multi-day “retreat.” This culminated in one student suffering a lacerated spleen after reportedly being slammed onto a table or similar surface. The chapter faced misdemeanor hazing charges, a temporary restraining order from the university, and ultimately a significant suspension from campus.

Subsequent years have seen various fraternities and other student organizations at UH disciplined for violations that typically involve alcohol misuse and behavior “likely to produce mental or physical discomfort.” While specific details can be challenging to obtain without a formal legal request, the pattern reflects ongoing challenges with ensuring compliance with hazing policies within some campus groups. The penalties have ranged from probation to multi-year suspensions, signaling the university’s intent to enforce its policies, though the gaps in public disciplinary reporting can sometimes obscure the full scope of existing problems.

5.1.4 How a UH Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Throckmorton County family whose child experiences hazing at the University of Houston, the legal process can be complex. Involved law enforcement agencies may include the University of Houston Police Department (UHPD) for on-campus incidents, or the Houston Police Department (HPD) for off-campus events within city limits. Criminal charges would be filed in Harris County courts.

Civil lawsuits alleging negligence, wrongful death, or other civil torts might be filed in Harris County District Courts. Potential defendants in such a case could include:

• Individual students directly involved in the hazing.
• The local chapter of the fraternity or organization.
• The national fraternity or sorority headquarters.
• Potentially the University of Houston itself, though sovereign immunity for public universities must be carefully navigated, focusing on exceptions for gross negligence or Title IX violations.
• Owners of off-campus properties where hazing occurred, particularly if they were aware of dangerous activities.

The Houston legal landscape is well-equipped to handle complex litigation, and our Houston-based firm is ideally positioned to navigate these cases, whether your family is from Throckmorton County or local to the area.

5.1.5 What UH Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Throckmorton County and beyond with students at UH should remain vigilant and prepared:

• Know UH’s Reporting Mechanisms: Familiarize yourself with the Dean of Students’ reporting portal (https://uh.edu/dos/) and the UHPD non-emergency number if you suspect hazing.
• Document Everything: If you suspect or confirm hazing, collect screenshots of digital communications, photos of injuries, and any other evidence. Note down dates, times, and specific details.
• Prioritize Medical Care: Do not hesitate to seek medical attention for any injury or psychological distress. Medical records are crucial for documenting harm.
• Consider a Houston-Experienced Hazing Attorney: Due to UH’s urban setting, connections to the city of Houston are vital. A lawyer experienced in Houston-based hazing cases, particularly those involving large organizations and public universities, can help uncover prior disciplinary actions and internal university files, which are often not publicly available.

5.2 Texas A&M University

Texas A&M University, a colossal public institution in College Station, holds a unique place in the hearts of many Texans. Students from Throckmorton County, like countless others across the state, are often drawn by its rich traditions, strong academic programs, and the enduring spirit of the Aggie community. While College Station is a significant distance from Throckmorton County, the bonds of the Aggie Network are strong, and our firm is dedicated to supporting families whose students attend this storied university.

5.2.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Throckmorton County Connection)

Texas A&M is renowned for its deep-seated traditions, the pervasive “Aggie Spirit,” and the iconic Corps of Cadets. This culture fosters fierce loyalty and camaraderie, but like any institution with strong hierarchies and rites of passage, it can inadvertently create environments where hazing, disguised as “tradition” or “discipline,” takes root. Greek life at A&M is also substantial, adding another layer to the campus’s social landscape. For students from Throckmorton County, the transition to such a tradition-heavy environment can be both exciting and, at times, overwhelming, as they learn to navigate complex social cues and expectations.

5.2.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Texas A&M University unequivocally prohibits hazing, adhering strictly to Texas law. Its policies explicitly state that any hazing act, on or off campus, that endangers a student’s mental or physical health or safety for the purpose of initiation, affiliation, or membership is forbidden. A&M works to educate students and organizations about these policies and provides numerous avenues for reporting:

• Division of Student Affairs: Oversees student conduct and hazing investigations.
• University Police Department (UPD): For criminal hazing incidents.
• Corps of Cadets Leadership: Has its own internal mechanisms for addressing misconduct within the Corps, which are separate from but can overlap with general university procedures.
• Online Reporting Systems: Including anonymous reporting forms for those who fear reprisal.

Texas A&M publishes an annual Hazing Report, detailing violations and sanctions, which is an important resource for transparency.

5.2.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Texas A&M has faced its share of hazing controversies, often involving either Greek life or the Corps of Cadets, highlighting the pervasive nature of these issues even within highly structured environments.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) Lawsuit (around 2021): A high-profile civil lawsuit was filed by two pledges who alleged harrowing hazing. They claimed they were forced to engage in strenuous activities and were subsequently covered with a mixture of substances, including industrial-strength cleaner, raw eggs, and spit. This resulted in severe chemical burns that required skin graft surgeries. The local SAE chapter was suspended by the university for two years, and the pledges sought substantial damages to cover their medical and emotional trauma. This case vividly illustrates the extreme physical dangers of modern hazing.
• Corps of Cadets Lawsuit (2023): This case involved a former cadet who alleged degrading and sexually explicit hazing as part of the Corps’ initiation processes. The lawsuit described “roasted pig” rituals, where new members were bound between beds, and other forms of psychological and physical abuse. The cadet sought over $1 million in damages, accusing the university of failing to protect him despite its anti-hazing policies. While A&M stated it handled the matter under its internal rules, the lawsuit brought public scrutiny to practices within the Corps.
• Kappa Sigma (KS) Allegations (2023, ongoing): More recently, allegations against a Kappa Sigma chapter at Texas A&M included physical hazing resulting in severe injuries, specifically rhabdomyolysis—a serious medical condition involving breakdown of muscle tissue, often caused by extreme physical exertion, and potentially leading to kidney failure. This case highlights the need for specialized legal representation for individuals suffering from highly specific and devastating hazing-related injuries.

These incidents underscore that hazing at Texas A&M is a recurrent problem, demanding constant diligence from the university and vigilance from parents and students.

5.2.4 How a Texas A&M Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Throckmorton County family dealing with a hazing incident at Texas A&M, the legal pathway involves specific considerations given the university’s public status and the local jurisdiction. Criminal investigations would involve the University Police Department (UPD) for campus issues, or the Bryan Police Department or Brazos County Sheriff’s Office for off-campus events. Criminal charges would be prosecuted in Brazos County courts.

Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in Brazos County District Courts. Potential liable parties are similar to those at UH: individual students, the local chapter, the national organization, and potentially Texas A&M University itself (with careful navigation of sovereign immunity exceptions for gross negligence or Title IX issues). The firm’s ability to thoroughly investigate both Greek life and Corps hazing is crucial given A&M’s unique environment.

5.2.5 What Texas A&M Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Throckmorton County with children at Texas A&M should be keenly aware of the hazing risks, particularly within groups that emphasize “tradition” and hierarchy:

• Scrutinize “Traditions”: Discuss with your student the difference between healthy traditions (e.g., Midnight Yell, Silver Taps) and potentially dangerous “rites of passage” that involve humiliation, alcohol, or physical abuse.
• Utilize Reporting Channels: If you suspect hazing, immediately report to the Dean of Student’s office, the Corps leadership (if relevant), or Texas A&M UPD. The University’s Hazing Report can be found on their website, providing valuable records of past incidents.
• Preserve Digital Evidence: GroupMe, Snapchat, and other messaging apps are heavily used in College Station. Educate your student on how to screenshot and save these communications, which are often critical evidence.
• Contact a Texas Hazing Attorney: An attorney with experience in hazing claims against large public universities and their associated organizations (including the Corps of Cadets) will understand the specific policies and culture of Texas A&M, strengthening your ability to achieve accountability and justice.

5.3 University of Texas at Austin (UT)

The University of Texas at Austin is the flagship institution of the UT System, a vibrant and massive campus nestled in the state capital. Attracting students from every corner of Texas, including Throckmorton County, UT Austin is a beacon of academic excellence, innovation, and a bustling social scene. While Throckmorton County is several hours northwest of Austin, the draw of UT is profound, and our firm is prepared to assist any family whose student encounters hazing at this prestigious university.

5.3.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Throckmorton County Connection)

UT Austin’s culture is dynamic, often perceived as more socially liberal and fiercely independent compared to some other Texas universities. Its Greek system is extensive and highly visible, alongside numerous other student organizations, spirit groups, and athletic teams. Students from Throckmorton County, transitioning to this large, fast-paced urban environment, often seek camaraderie in these organizations. The university’s strong athletic programs and passionate fan base also contribute to a culture where traditions can sometimes blur the line into hazing. Austin’s plentiful off-campus venues add to the complexity of monitoring student activities.

5.3.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

The University of Texas at Austin maintains a clear and comprehensive anti-hazing policy that is fully compliant with Texas law. Its policies explicitly prohibit any form of hazing, whether on or off campus, that endangers a student’s physical or mental health or safety. UT’s policy is particularly thorough in covering various forms of coercion, physical abuse, psychological torment, and alcohol-related activities.

UT provides multiple avenues for reporting hazing:

• Dean of Students Office / Student Conduct and Academic Integrity: Manages all student organizational misconduct allegations.
• The University of Texas Police Department (UTPD): For criminal incidents.
• Title IX Office: If hazing involves sexual harassment or assault.
• Online Reporting Forms: Anonymous reporting options are prominently featured.

A notable aspect of UT’s approach is its public Hazing Violations webpage (hazing.utexas.edu), which lists organizations, the nature of their violations, and the sanctions imposed. This is a model of transparency that aids families and researchers alike.

5.3.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

The transparency provided by UT’s public hazing log showcases that, despite robust policies, hazing remains a persistent issue. The log, which families from Throckmorton County can review, often reveals repeat offenders and consistent patterns of misconduct.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike) (Multiple Incidents): UT’s hazing log frequently features Pi Kappa Alpha for various violations. For instance, in 2023, the chapter was sanctioned for directing new members to consume milk and perform strenuous calisthenics, which the university classified as hazing. This led to probation and requirements for enhanced hazing-prevention education. The national Pi Kappa Alpha organization also has a well-documented history of alcohol-related hazing incidents leading to serious injury and death, making any incident at UT particularly concerning.
• Texas Wranglers (Spirit Organization): Several spirit and tradition organizations, such as the Texas Wranglers, have been disciplined. In 2023, the Wranglers were sanctioned for violations including alcohol and drug misconduct, blindfolding, kidnapping, and verbally degrading new members. This highlights that hazing extends beyond Greek life.
• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE) (Ongoing Issues): The UT Austin chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon has faced numerous suspensions, including one in 2024 related to an alleged assault on an exchange student, and previous ones for hazing and safety violations. This aligns with a national pattern for SAE, which has a track record of severe hazing incidents across the country.

These examples underscore that UT actively investigates and sanctions, but the recurrence of hazing, even among prominent groups, indicates that vigilance is always necessary.

5.3.4 How a UT Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a family from Throckmorton County whose child is subjected to hazing at UT Austin, the legal process will involve the specific jurisdictions of the capital city. Criminal investigations could be handled by the University of Texas Police Department (UTPD) for incidents occurring on campus, or by the Austin Police Department (APD) for off-campus events within city limits, with criminal charges filed in Travis County courts.

Civil lawsuits would typically be filed in Travis County District Courts. Potential defendants could include individuals, the local chapter, the national fraternity/sorority, and the University of Texas itself. Suing UT, as a public university, would involve navigating sovereign immunity laws, emphasizing exceptions related to gross negligence, willful misconduct, or specific Title IX-related claims. The firm’s experience with public records requests is particularly valuable for UT cases, leveraging records like their public hazing log and other internal university documents.

5.3.5 What UT Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Throckmorton County with students at UT Austin should utilize the university’s transparency and be proactive:

• Check the UT Hazing Violations Log: Prior to joining any organization, parents and students should review UT’s public log (hazing.utexas.edu) to understand an organization’s history, which can be a strong predictor of future behavior.
• Understand UT’s Campus-Specific Reporting: Know the channels for reporting hazing at UT, including the Dean of Students, UTPD, and online forms.
• Document and Preserve Evidence: Given UT’s proactive approach to hazing, meticulous documentation of any incident—from digital communications to medical records—is crucial.
• Contact a Texas Hazing Attorney: An attorney experienced in hazing lawsuits against major public universities and organizations in Austin can effectively use UT’s internal records to build a compelling case, providing expert guidance for families across Texas.

5.4 Southern Methodist University (SMU)

Southern Methodist University, a distinguished private institution in North Texas, attracts a diverse student body, including students from Throckmorton County, despite the considerable distance to Dallas. SMU is known for its beautiful campus, rigorous academics, and a vibrant, often prominent, Greek life. Our firm serves families throughout Texas, and we are well-versed in navigating the unique legal landscape presented by private universities like SMU.

5.4.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Throckmorton County Connection)

SMU’s culture is often characterized by strong traditions, an active social scene centered around its Greek organizations, and a close-knit community. Students from Throckmorton County might find this environment both alluring and demanding, as the social pressures within certain student groups can be intense. The university’s emphasis on community, while positive in many ways, can sometimes lead to insular organizational cultures where hazing practices are perpetuated under the guise of “bonding” or “exclusivity.” The affluent nature of a portion of the student body can also introduce dynamics related to resources and social expectations within Greek life.

5.4.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Southern Methodist University maintains a clearly articulated anti-hazing policy, emphasizing a zero-tolerance approach. Its policy, which aligns with Texas law, defines hazing broadly to include any mental or physical endangerment, humiliation, or coercion associated with gaining or maintaining membership in an organization. As a private institution, SMU has the authority to impose swift and stringent disciplinary actions against individuals and organizations found in violation.

Reporting channels at SMU include:

• Dean of Students Office: The central point for student conduct and organizational behavior complaints.
• SMU Police Department: For any criminal hazing acts.
• Title IX Coordinator: For gender-based discrimination or sexual harassment linked to hazing.
• Online Reporting Forms: Including an anonymous reporting option to encourage students to come forward without fear of retribution.

SMU strives to educate its community on hazing prevention and the importance of reporting to maintain a safe campus environment.

5.4.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

While private universities generally have less public transparency regarding disciplinary actions compared to public institutions, incidents at SMU have periodically come to light, demonstrating that hazing remains a challenge.

• Kappa Alpha Order Incident (2017): One notable event involved the Kappa Alpha Order fraternity, which faced allegations of hazing that included members being paddled, forced to consume alcohol, and subjected to sleep deprivation. This led to a significant suspension from campus activities and a restriction on their ability to recruit new members for several years, until around 2021. Such suspensions reflect SMU’s commitment to enforcing its policies.
• General Disciplinary Actions: Throughout the years, SMU has disciplined various Greek organizations and other student groups for violations of university policy, often involving alcohol misconduct, physical intimidation, and inappropriate initiation activities. While specific details might be less public than those at large state universities, these actions confirm a recurring pattern of behavior that SMU actively addresses through internal processes.

These incidents highlight that even at private universities with strong oversight efforts, hazing can persist, underscoring the ongoing need for vigilance.

5.4.4 How an SMU Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Throckmorton County family whose child experiences hazing at SMU, the legal process involves unique considerations due to its private status. Criminal investigations would involve the SMU Police Department for campus incidents, and the Dallas Police Department for off-campus events within Dallas city limits. Criminal charges would be filed in Dallas County courts.

Civil lawsuits against SMU would typically be filed in Dallas County District Courts. As a private institution, SMU is not protected by sovereign immunity to the same extent as public universities like UT or Texas A&M. This can potentially make pursuing a lawsuit against the university more straightforward, depending on the specifics of the case. Potential defendants might include the individual students involved, the local chapter, the national fraternity or sorority, and SMU itself. Our firm has extensive experience navigating tort claims against private entities, making us well-equipped to handle SMU hazing cases.

5.4.5 What SMU Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Throckmorton County with students at SMU should be particularly attentive to the social dynamics within organizations and utilize available reporting tools:

• Understand SMU’s Specific Policies: Familiarize yourself with SMU’s anti-hazing policies and the specific consequences for violations, which can be found on their student affairs website.
• Utilize SMU’s Reporting Systems: Use the Dean of Students office, SMU PD, or anonymous online reporting mechanisms if you suspect or witness hazing.
• Recognize “Cultural Code” Pressures: Discuss with your student how to distinguish between healthy group bonding and coercive “traditions” that fall under the hazing definition, particularly considering the strong social expectations present at SMU.
• Contact a Texas Hazing Attorney: An attorney specializing in hazing cases, especially those involving private universities, can advise on the specific discovery processes and liability avenues relevant to SMU, ensuring families from across Texas receive expert legal guidance.

5.5 Baylor University

Baylor University, a private Baptist university in Waco, holds a distinct position among Texas institutions. It draws students from throughout the state, including individuals from Throckmorton County, offering a faith-based educational environment. While Waco is geographically closer to other major cities than Throckmorton County, its unique identity and history warrant specific attention when discussing hazing. Our firm is committed to supporting families across Texas, including those affected by incidents at Baylor.

5.5.1 Campus & Culture Snapshot (with Throckmorton County Connection)

Baylor’s culture is deeply influenced by its Christian mission and strong academic focus. Its Greek life is active, alongside numerous other registered student organizations, athletic programs, and faith-based groups. For students from Throckmorton County, the opportunity to attend a university with a strong spiritual emphasis can be a significant draw. However, like any institution, Baylor has faced challenges related to balancing student conduct, tradition, and safety. Its past, particularly the highly publicized sexual assault scandal involving its football program and Title IX oversight, has created a heightened awareness around issues of institutional accountability and student well-being.

5.5.2 Official Hazing Policy & Reporting Channels

Baylor University maintains a comprehensive anti-hazing policy that strictly prohibits any conduct that endangers the mental or physical health or safety of its students. The policy covers all recognized student organizations, sports teams, and groups, regardless of whether the hazing occurs on or off campus, or is perceived as voluntary. Baylor emphasizes an educational approach to prevention, coupled with clear disciplinary consequences for violations.

Reporting channels at Baylor include:

• Student Conduct Administration: For general student organizational misconduct.
• Baylor Police Department: For criminal hazing incidents.
• Title IX Coordinator: Given Baylor’s history, this office is particularly central for any hazing involving gender-based discrimination or sexual harassment.
• Anonymous Reporting Systems: Baylor offers various confidential reporting mechanisms to encourage students to come forward without fear.

Baylor’s commitment to accountability has been under intense scrutiny in recent years, leading to strengthened policies and reporting procedures.

5.5.3 Selected Documented Incidents & Responses

Baylor University’s institutional integrity has been tested by past scandals, which have, in turn, fostered a more rigorous approach to student safety, including hazing prevention.

• Baylor Baseball Hazing (2020): In a significant incident, 14 members of the Baylor baseball team were suspended following an investigation into hazing allegations. The university implemented staggered suspensions over the early portion of the baseball season, sending a clear message that hazing within athletic programs would not be tolerated. The investigation reportedly involved multiple forms of misconduct.
• Historic Disciplinary Actions: While specific details of older hazing incidents are not always readily available to the public, Baylor has historically disciplined various Greek and other student organizations for violations related to alcohol misuse, physical mistreatment, and inappropriate initiation activities. These actions are part of Baylor’s ongoing effort to align its campus culture with its stated values and policies.

These incidents indicate that despite its faith-based mission and a proactive stance on student safety, Baylor, like other universities, continues to grapple with hazing, requiring consistent enforcement and ongoing vigilance.

5.4.4 How a Baylor Hazing Case Might Proceed

For a Throckmorton County family whose child experiences hazing at Baylor University, the legal process will be influenced by Baylor’s status as a private university and its specific jurisdiction. Criminal investigations would involve the Baylor Police Department for on-campus incidents, and the Waco Police Department or McLennan County Sheriff’s Office for off-campus events. Criminal charges would be filed in McLennan County courts.

Civil lawsuits against Baylor would typically be filed in McLennan County District Courts. As with SMU, Baylor’s private status means it is not shielded by sovereign immunity in the same way as public universities. This can simplify the legal path to holding the institution directly accountable for negligence or other tortious conduct related to hazing. Potential defendants include individuals, local chapters, national organizations, and Baylor University itself. Our firm’s experience with complex litigation, including cases involving institutional accountability at private universities, makes us a strong advocate for families navigating these challenging circumstances.

5.4.5 What Baylor Students & Parents Should Do

Families from Throckmorton County with students at Baylor University should engage actively with the university’s resources and remain proactive:

• Familiarize with Baylor’s Policies: Understand Baylor’s strict hazing policies and the disciplinary process for students and organizations, accessible through its student conduct office website.
• Prioritize Confidential Reporting: Utilize Baylor’s anonymous reporting options, especially if there is fear of retaliation, but also understand the benefits of formal reporting to ensure a thorough investigation.
• Discuss Campus Culture: Engage in open conversations with your student about the pressures they might face within student groups and the distinction between healthy camaraderie and harmful hazing “traditions,” particularly within a values-driven environment.
• Contact a Texas Hazing Attorney: An attorney with experience in hazing cases against private universities, especially those with a history of navigating sensitive institutional issues like Baylor’s, can provide invaluable legal insight and strategic guidance for families throughout Texas.

6. FRATERNITIES & SORORITIES: CAMPUS-SPECIFIC + NATIONAL HISTORIES

A critical component of understanding hazing on Texas campuses, from UH to Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor, is recognizing that local chapters are not isolated entities. They are typically extensions of larger national or international organizations, many of which have extensive, publicly known histories of hazing. For families in Throckmorton County, acknowledging this link is vital, as it connects local incidents to broader patterns of organizational behavior and accountability.

6.1 Why National Histories Matter

Many fraternities and sororities operating at these Texas universities are part of vast national organizations, such as Pi Kappa Alpha (Pike), Sigma Alpha Epsilon (SAE), Phi Delta Theta, Pi Kappa Phi, and Kappa Alpha Order, among many others. These national headquarters often publish thick anti-hazing manuals, host risk management training, and issue strong statements against hazing. They do this not purely out of altruism, but because they have witnessed, and been held responsible for, thousands of hazing incidents, including catastrophic injuries and deaths, across chapters nationwide.

National organizations are acutely aware of the patterns that lead to hazing tragedies: the forced drinking at “Big/Little” events, the physical beatings in “tradition rooms,” the humiliating rituals perpetrated by older members on pledges. This knowledge is precisely why their own policies prohibit such acts.

When a local chapter at a Texas university, perhaps involving a student from Throckmorton County, repeats the same scripts—the forced alcohol consumption, the brutal physical challenges, the callous disregard for safety—that have led to severe injury or death at another chapter in a different state, it significantly impacts legal liability. This constitutes foreseeability; the national organization knew or should have known these types of incidents were possible, having occurred elsewhere within its own system. This pattern of misconduct strengthens arguments for negligence or even punitive damages against national entities who failed to adequately prevent repeat offenses.

6.2 Organization Mapping (Synthesized)

Delving into the history of specific national fraternities and sororities reveals recurring patterns that underscore why their presence on Texas campuses should be scrutinized. This is not an exhaustive list of all organizations or incidents but focuses on those with well-documented national hazing issues relevant to claims of foreseeability and systemic negligence.

• Pi Kappa Alpha (ΠΚΑ / Pike): This fraternity has one of the most concerning national hazing histories, particularly regarding alcohol-related fatalities.

  • Stone Foltz – Bowling Green State University (2021): As discussed, a pledge died from alcohol poisoning after being forced to consume an entire bottle of liquor during a “Big/Little” night. The national Pi Kappa Alpha organization was ordered to pay $7 million in a $10 million settlement, clearly demonstrating its liability for a known, recurring hazing pattern.
  • David Bogenberger – Northern Illinois University (2012): A pledge died from alcohol poisoning during a fraternity event, leading to a $14 million settlement for the family.
  • Pattern Evidence: These are but two examples in a history rife with alcohol-related hazing incidents, highlighting a perceived organizational tolerance for dangerous drinking rituals. When a chapter at UH, Texas A&M, or UT Austin engages in similar tactics, it amplifies the argument that the national organization failed to protect its members despite prior warnings and tragedies.

• Sigma Alpha Epsilon (ΣΑΕ / SAE): SAE has faced numerous hazing-related deaths and severe injuries nationwide, prompting the organization to notoriously (and briefly) eliminate its pledge process entirely in 2014, a policy it later reversed.

  • University of Alabama – Traumatic Brain Injury (2023): A pledge allegedly suffered a traumatic brain injury during a hazing ritual, leading to a lawsuit against the fraternity.
  • Texas A&M University – Chemical Burns (2021): As detailed earlier, two pledges alleged they were covered in industrial-strength cleaner and other substances, causing severe chemical burns requiring skin graft surgeries. The chapter was already under university suspension.
  • University of Texas at Austin – Assault (2024): A student alleged assault by fraternity members at a party, occurring while the chapter was already under university suspension for prior misconduct.
  • Pattern Evidence: SAE’s history demonstrates a persistent challenge in controlling local chapter behavior, despite national efforts. This pattern is particularly evident in Texas, with incidents surfacing at both A&M and UT chapters, showcasing a recurring theme of physical and chemical abuse.

• Phi Delta Theta (ΦΔΘ): This fraternity was at the center of a landmark hazing death.

  • Maxwell “Max” Gruver – Louisiana State University (2017): A pledge died from acute alcohol poisoning during a “Bible study” drinking game, leading to criminal convictions and a $6.1 million verdict against an individual and their insurer.
  • Pattern Evidence: The Gruver case established Phi Delta Theta’s direct link to deadly alcohol hazing, and any similar incidents at their chapters at Texas universities would strongly invoke this precedent.

• Pi Kappa Phi (ΠΚΦ): Another national organization linked to a high-profile alcohol hazing death.

  • Andrew Coffey – Florida State University (2017): A pledge died from alcohol poisoning during a “Big Brother Night” involving forced hard liquor consumption.
  • Pattern Evidence: Pi Kappa Phi’s national history, including this Florida State tragedy, points to a pattern of dangerous alcohol hazing, which could be relevant for any chapter at UH, Texas A&M, or UT.

• Beta Theta Pi (ΒΘΠ): Despite claiming a “dry housing” policy, this fraternity has been involved in one of the most extensively documented hazing tragedies.

  • Timothy Piazza – Penn State University (2017): A pledge died after an extreme alcohol hazing event combined with a criminal delay in seeking medical aid, leading to numerous criminal charges and major civil litigation.
  • Pattern Evidence: The Piazza case continues to be a national reference point for egregious institutional failures and a dangerous cover-up culture in hazing.

• Phi Gamma Delta (ΦΓΔ / FIJI):

  • Danny Santulli – University of Missouri (2021): A pledge suffered severe, permanent brain damage after being forced to drink an entire bottle of vodka during a “pledge dad reveal.” The Santulli family settled with 22 defendants, including the national fraternity, in multi-million-dollar settlements.
  • Pattern Evidence: This case exemplifies the catastrophic and life-altering consequences of forced alcohol hazing and the broad network of accountability that can be established.

• Kappa Sigma (ΚΣ): This fraternity also has a history of severe hazing.

  • Chad Meredith – University of Miami (2001): An 18-year-old freshman drowned after being persuaded by fraternity members to swim across a lake while intoxicated, leading to a $12.6 million verdict for the family.
  • Texas Christian University (2018): A member was arrested for allegedly hazing pledges.
  • Texas A&M University (2023, ongoing): Allegations of hazing resulting in severe PHSICAL injuries, potentially including rhabdomyolysis.
  • Pattern Evidence: Kappa Sigma’s history underscores the risk of alcohol along with physical hazing.

6.3 Tie Back to Legal Strategy

The documented national histories of these large fraternities and sororities, along with patterns of misconduct across a broad spectrum of organizations, are crucial to our legal strategy at The Manginello Law Firm. When a student from Throckmorton County or anywhere in Texas, suffers harm due to hazing at a Texas university, our investigation extends far beyond the local chapter.

• Establishing Foreseeability: We use these national precedents to argue that the national organization had prior knowledge—or should have had prior knowledge—of the specific hazing methods employed by its local chapters. This negates the common defense that the national body was unaware or that the local chapter was “rogue.”
• Challenging “Paper Policies”: While national organizations boast extensive anti-hazing policies, our firm meticulously examines whether these policies were genuinely enforced. Evidence of repeated violations across chapters, minimal punishments for past incidents, or inadequate training programs exposes a critical gap between policy and practice.
• Insurance Coverage Disputes: Prior hazing incidents, especially if they are part of a national pattern, can become central to disputes with insurance carriers. Insurers often try to deny coverage by claiming hazing is an “intentional act” excluded from policies. Our experience, particularly with attorney Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney, allows us to anticipate and counter these arguments.
• Leveraging for Punitive Damages: In cases where the national organization displayed a callous disregard for known risks or a repeated failure to act, we can pursue punitive damages. These damages, designed to punish egregious conduct and deter future harm, are a powerful tool for achieving accountability beyond mere compensation.

By connecting the local incident to a national history of misconduct, we demonstrate that hazing is rarely an isolated event. Instead, it is often a systemic problem, for which powerful national organizations and educational institutions must be held accountable. This approach is fundamental to securing justice and preventing future tragedies for families throughout Texas.

7. BUILDING A CASE: EVIDENCE, DAMAGES, STRATEGY

For Throckmorton County families and students impacted by hazing at a Texas university, building a strong legal case is paramount. This process demands a meticulous investigation, expert legal knowledge, and an understanding of how to translate profound suffering into legal remedies. The Manginello Law Firm approaches each hazing case with the investigative depth and strategic precision necessary to confront powerful institutions.

7.1 Evidence

In the modern era, hazing cases are increasingly won or lost based on the quality and volume of digital evidence. However, a comprehensive case builds upon multiple layers of evidence. Understanding what constitutes viable evidence is the first step for families from Throckmorton County.

• Digital Communications (THE MOST CRITICAL CATEGORY): These are often the “smoking gun” in today’s hazing cases. Organizations often think they are immune to being caught, but digital evidence betrays them.

  • Group Messaging Apps: Platforms like GroupMe, WhatsApp, iMessage/SMS group texts, Discord servers, and fraternity/sorority-specific apps are where hazing is planned, enacted, and often covered up. Our firm immediately seeks to preserve these. Screenshots taken by victims or witnesses, capturing full threads with sender names, timestamps, and context, are invaluable. Even if messages are deleted, digital forensics experts can often recover them, but direct preservation is always preferred.
  • Social Media Evidence: Instagram (stories, posts, DMs), Snapchat (snaps, stories, chat), TikTok (videos, comments, DMs), and Facebook posts or Messenger conversations frequently contain evidence. This includes photos or videos of hazing events, direct messages, comments, or even location tags that place individuals at hazing sites. We advise clients to screenshot everything immediately, as content on these platforms often disappears.
  • Text Messages/DMs: Individual texts can show coercion, instructions, or cover-up attempts. We guide clients on how to fully save these conversations.
  • Emails: Official or unofficial emails among members, or even communications with national organizations or university staff, can reveal planning or knowledge of hazing.

• Photos & Videos: Beyond digital communication, direct visual evidence is extremely powerful.

  • Injuries: Detailed photographs of bruises, burns, cuts, or other physical harm, taken immediately and over several days to show progression, with a ruler or coin for scale.
  • Locations & Objects: Photos of the site where hazing occurred, equipment used (paddles, alcohol bottles), conditions (filth, excessive alcohol), or anything pertinent to the incident.
  • Event Footage: Any video taken by participants during hazing, even if meant for internal sharing or humiliation, can be crucial. Our firm strongly advises against putting oneself in danger to obtain this.

• Internal Organization Documents: These can reveal the official policies (or lack thereof) and the internal messaging of the accused organization.

  • Pledge Manuals/Rites: Documents that outline initiation processes, “traditions,” or expectations for new members.
  • Communications: Emails, memos, or meeting minutes among chapter leadership, showing planning or discussions related to initiation activities.
  • National Policies: The national fraternity or sorority’s anti-hazing policies, risk management guidelines, and training materials are critical for demonstrating what they knew or should have known.

• University Records: Institutions like UH, Texas A&M, UT Austin, SMU, and Baylor maintain extensive records that can be accessed through discovery in a lawsuit, or sometimes via public records requests for public universities.

  • Prior Conduct Files: Disciplinary records of the accused organization, showing past hazing violations, probations, or suspensions. UT Austin’s public hazing log is an excellent example.
  • Campus Police Reports: Incident reports from university police departments related to the organization or individuals involved.
  • Clery Act Reports/Title IX Complaints: These aggregated reports can show patterns of misconduct or highlight specific incidents that trigger federal oversight.
  • Internal Communications: Emails or memos among university administrators or advisors discussing concerns about the organization.

• Medical and Psychological Records: These documents objectively confirm the extent of the harm suffered.

  • Emergency Room & Hospitalization Records: Detailing immediate injuries, diagnoses, treatments, and toxicology reports (for alcohol/drug use).
  • Ongoing Treatment Notes: Records from doctors, specialists, physical therapists, and mental health professionals (psychologists, psychiatrists) documenting long-term physical injuries, PTSD, depression, anxiety, or other trauma. These are vital for non-economic damages.

• Witness Testimony: Eyewitness accounts are essential for corroborating other forms of evidence.

  • Pledges/Members: Other new members or current members, especially those who may have quit or been expelled, can provide firsthand accounts.
  • Bystanders: Anyone who observed the hazing or its aftermath – roommates, RAs, coaches, trainers, or even off-campus bar staff.
  • Experts: Physicians, psychologists, digital forensics experts, and economists can provide specialized testimony.

7.2 Damages

When hazing leads to injury or death, the law aims to provide compensation for the full scope of that harm. For Throckmorton County families, understanding the types of damages recoverable can help in comprehending the value of a claim. While every case is unique and specific outcomes cannot be guaranteed, hazing lawsuits seek to cover both concrete financial losses and intangible suffering.

• Medical Bills & Future Care: This category covers all costs associated with treatment, both past and future.

  • Immediate Care: Emergency room visits, ambulance transport, and initial hospitalization.
  • Ongoing Treatment: Surgeries, physical therapy, rehabilitation, prescription medications, and specialist consultations.
  • Long-Term Care: For catastrophic injuries (e.g., traumatic brain injury, organ damage from alcohol poisoning), this can include lifetime care plans, skilled nursing, and adaptive equipment.

• Lost Earnings & Educational Impact: Hazing can disrupt a student’s academic and professional trajectory.

  • Lost Wages: For students forced to miss work because of injuries or trauma, or for parents who must take time off to care for their child.
  • Tuition/Fees: For semesters missed or for transferring to a different institution due to the hazing.
  • Lost Scholarships: If academic or athletic scholarships are revoked or jeopardized.
  • Diminished Earning Capacity: If permanent injuries or psychological trauma hinder a student’s ability to pursue their chosen career or maintain employment, economists are often engaged to calculate decades of lost potential earnings.

• Non-Economic Damages: These compensate for the subjective, intangible harms that are no less real.

  • Physical Pain and Suffering: For the immediate and ongoing pain caused by injuries.
  • Emotional Distress: Covering psychological trauma such as PTSD, depression, anxiety, humiliation, shame, and loss of dignity. This often requires professional mental health intervention, and therapy records are crucial.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: For the inability to participate in previously enjoyed activities, social isolation, and a diminished quality of life.

• Wrongful Death Damages (For Families): When hazing results in a fatality, as in the cases of Max Gruver, Stone Foltz, and Timothy Piazza, surviving family members (parents, spouses, children) can recover damages for their profound loss.

  • Funeral and Burial Costs: Direct expenses related to the death.
  • Loss of Companionship, Love, and Society: Compensation for the profound emotional void left by the deceased.
  • Loss of Financial Support: If the deceased would have contributed to the family’s income or support over their lifetime.
  • Grief and Emotional Suffering: For the deep sorrow, mental anguish, and emotional trauma experienced by family members.

• Punitive Damages: In egregious cases, especially where defendants acted with extreme recklessness or malicious intent, punitive damages may be sought. These are not meant to compensate the victim but to punish the wrongdoer and deter similar conduct in the future. In Texas, punitive damages are available but capped in many cases, except for certain intentional torts. Proving gross negligence or willful misconduct is key for maximizing potential punitive awards.

7.3 Role of Different Defendants and Insurance Coverage

A significant challenge in hazing litigation is navigating the complex web of potential defendants and their respective insuranceカバー. National fraternities, universities, and individuals often rely on aggressive legal teams and intricate insurance policies to limit their liability. However, our expertise at The Manginello Law Firm allows us to strategically confront these defenses. Attorney Lupe Peña’s background as a former insurance defense attorney provides invaluable insight into how these organizations and their insurers operate.

• Identifying All Potential Coverage: We diligently identify all possible sources of insurance:

  • National Fraternity/Sorority Policies: These are umbrella policies designed to cover the entire organization and its chapters.
  • Local Chapter Policies: Some individual chapters may have their own liability policies.
  • University Policies: Both public and private universities carry extensive liability insurance.
  • Homeowner’s/Personal Liability Policies: Individual students involved in hazing may have coverage through their parents’ policies.

• Navigating Exclusions: The “Intentional Act” Defense: A common tactic by insurers is to argue that hazing (especially physical abuse or forced intoxication) constitutes an “intentional act” or “criminal act” and is therefore excluded from coverage under their policies.

  • Our firm counters this by focusing on the negligent supervision and failure to prevent aspects of the case. While the individual who physically assaulted or forced drinking may have acted intentionally, the argument can be that the national organization or university was negligent in failing to train, supervise, enforce policies, or intervene despite a known pattern of hazing. Negligence claims are typically covered by insurance.
  • We also argue that the acts of the individuals, if reckless, fall under various coverage provisions, and that if an insurer wrongfully denies coverage, they may open themselves up to bad faith claims.

• Sovereign Immunity for Public Universities: For public institutions like UH, Texas A&M, and UT Austin, the doctrine of sovereign immunity protects them from many lawsuits unless specific exceptions apply. Our firm excels at identifying these exceptions, which can include claims of gross negligence, willful misconduct, or specific violations of federal statutes like Title IX. We also pursue claims against individual university employees in their personal capacity when appropriate, bypassing institutional immunity. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have no such immunity.

• Thorough Discovery and Pre-Trial Strategy: Our team utilizes rigorous discovery methods to uncover internal communications, prior incident reports, and policy documents from all defendants that weaken their arguments and bolster our claims. This includes subpoenaing national fraternity records, university conduct files, and digital evidence from multiple sources. Our goal is to develop a comprehensive strategy that compels accountability, whether through negotiation and settlement, or by taking the case to trial.

Our comprehensive approach ensures that all liable parties are identified, and all avenues for compensation are explored, providing Throckmorton County families with the strongest possible representation against those responsible for hazing.

8. PRACTICAL GUIDES & FAQS

When hazing strikes, families in Throckmorton County and across Texas are often bewildered, afraid, and unsure of where to turn. This section offers practical, actionable advice for parents, students, and witnesses, empowering them with the information they need to protect themselves and seek justice.

8.1 For Parents

Parents in Throckmorton County send their children off to college with trust and high hopes. Being prepared for the possibility of hazing, and knowing how to respond, is vital.

• Warning Signs of Hazing: Be attuned to changes in your child’s behavior.

  • Unexplained Injuries: Look for bruises, burns, cuts, or “accidents” with inconsistent explanations.
  • Extreme Fatigue: Sudden, profound exhaustion, sleep deprivation, or constant late-night demands from their organization.
  • Drastic Mood Changes: Increased anxiety, depression, irritability, withdrawal, or an unusual level of secrecy.
  • Possessive Phone Use: Constant checking of group chats, fear of missing “mandatory” communications, or an inability to put their phone down.
  • Loss of Interest: Withdrawal from old friends, hobbies, or previously enjoyed activities outside the organization.
  • Academic Decline: Sudden drop in grades, missed classes, or inability to concentrate.
  • Financial Red Flags: Unexpected requests for money, unexplained purchases, or vague spending.

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

  • Open-Ended Questions: Instead of “Are you being hazed?” ask, “How are things really going?”, “Is anything making you uncomfortable?”, or “Do you feel safe?”
  • Emphasize Safety Over Status: Reassure them that their well-being is your priority, not their membership in an organization.
  • Unconditional Support: Let them know you will support them no matter what, and that they won’t “get in trouble” with you for being honest.

• If Your Child Is Hurt: Act swiftly and strategically.

  • Seek Medical Care Immediately: Prioritize their physical and mental health. Take them to the nearest ER or health clinic. Medical records are critical.
  • Document Everything Meticulously: Photograph any injuries from multiple angles. If your child shows you any digital evidence (texts, photos), screenshot it immediately from their phone (or ask them to do it). Write down names, dates, times, and everything your child tells you while it’s fresh.
  • Preserve Physical Evidence: Keep any relevant clothing, receipts for forced purchases, or other objects associated with the incident.

• Dealing with the University: Be cautious and strategic in your communications.

  • Document All Interactions: Keep a detailed log of every phone call, email, or meeting with university administrators, including who you spoke to and what was said.
  • Ask Specific Questions: Inquire about the organization’s prior disciplinary history, the specific hazing policies, and the investigative process.
  • DO NOT Sign Anything: Never sign any waivers, releases, or “resolution” agreements with the university without first consulting an experienced attorney.

• When to Talk to a Lawyer: Earlier is always better, especially for Throckmorton County families needing Texas-wide counsel.

  • If There’s Significant Harm: Any physical injury requiring medical attention or psychological trauma (PTSD, severe anxiety) warrants legal consultation.
  • If There’s a Cover-Up: If you suspect the university or organization is minimizing or hiding what happened, or obstructing your efforts to get information.
  • For Expert Guidance: An experienced hazing attorney can help you navigate university bureaucracy, preserve evidence, protect your child from retaliation, and pursue all available legal remedies.

8.2 For Students / Pledges

To any student in Throckmorton County, or across Texas, who is currently or fears they might be hazed: you are not alone, and you have rights.

• Is This Hazing or Just Tradition? The line can feel blurry, but ask yourself:

  • Am I being forced or pressured to do something I don’t want to do?
  • Would I do this if my parents, a dean, or the public were watching?
  • Does this activity endanger my mental or physical health, humiliate me, or exploit me?
  • Am I being told to keep secrets or lie about what’s happening?
  • If you answer yes to any of these, it is hazing, not tradition.

• Why “Consent” Isn’t the End of the Story: Despite what older members might say, your “agreement” to participate under pressure is likely not considered true legal consent. The law in Texas, and courts across the country, recognize the immense power dynamics at play. The desire to belong, fear of exclusion, or threats of social isolation make “consent” meaningless in a hazing context. You are the victim of a crime, regardless of what you were told or felt you had to do.

• Exiting and Reporting Safely: Your safety is paramount.

  • If in Immediate Danger: Call 911 or campus police. Get to a safe place. Your life and well-being are more important than potential organizational repercussions.
  • To Quit/De-Pledge: You have the legal right to leave any organization at any time. Do it in writing (email) and inform a trusted adult outside the group. Avoid confronting members alone, especially if you fear pressure or retaliation.
  • Good-Faith Reporting and Amnesty: If you or a friend is in a medical emergency due to hazing (e.g., alcohol poisoning), call 911 immediately. Texas law and most university policies include “good Samaritan” provisions, offering immunity or leniency to individuals who call for help in an emergency, even if underage drinking was involved. Your priority should be saving a life.

• Evidence Collection (for Students): Your phone is your most powerful tool.

  • Screenshot Everything: Group chats (GroupMe, WhatsApp, Snapchat, Instagram DMs), text messages, photos, and videos. Include dates, times, and participant names. Do NOT delete anything, even embarrassing content.
  • Recordings: Texas is a “one-party consent” state, meaning you can legally record conversations you are a part of without needing permission from others. Use voice memos to record meetings or direct interactions.
  • Medical Documentation: Seek medical attention for any injury or distress, and tell medical providers you were hazed so it’s documented.

8.3 For Former Members / Witnesses

If you are a former member, or a current member or witness, who took part in hazing or observed it, and now find yourself burdened by guilt or regret, know that your decision to come forward can be life-saving.

• Your Testimony Matters: Your firsthand account and any evidence you possess can be instrumental in preventing future harm and holding those responsible accountable. You have the power to create real change and potentially save lives.
• Navigating Legal Exposure: We understand you may fear personal legal consequences (both criminal and civil). However, there are often ways to navigate this. Immunity for good-faith reporting in Texas can protect you. An experienced attorney can advise you on your rights, help you understand the implications of cooperation, and, in some cases, negotiate with prosecutors or victims’ attorneys to protect your interests while enabling you to do the right thing.
• A Path to Accountability: Cooperating with an investigation, civil lawsuit, or law enforcement can be a profound step toward accountability for yourself, for the organization involved, and for future students. It can become a path to peace of mind, knowing you contributed to stopping a dangerous cycle.

8.4 Critical Mistakes That Can Destroy Your Case

For any family in Throckmorton County or across Texas dealing with hazing, certain missteps can severely undermine a legal case. The Manginello Law Firm constantly advises against these common, but often well-intentioned, errors.

MISTAKES THAT CAN RUIN YOUR HAZING CASE:

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

   • What families often think: “I don’t want them to get in more trouble,” or “This content is embarrassing; it should be erased.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Deliberate deletion can be construed as a cover-up, makes it look like you’re hiding something, and can even be considered obstruction of justice. It often renders a strong case nearly impossible to prove.
   • What to do instead: Preserve absolutely everything – even potentially embarrassing content. If you need to make it private, move it to a secure cloud or email it to a trusted adult, but do not delete it from its original source.

2. Confronting the Fraternity/Sorority Directly:

   • What families often think: “I’m going to give them a piece of my mind and demand answers.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This immediately puts the organization on high alert. They will likely lawyer up, immediately delete evidence, coach witnesses on what to say, and start building their defenses against you. You lose the element of surprise.
   • What to do instead: Document everything, then contact an attorney before any direct confrontation. Let your legal counsel manage all communications with the organization.

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

   • What universities often do: They may pressure families to sign waivers or “internal resolution” agreements, often framed as a quick way to put the incident behind them.
   • Why it’s wrong: These documents almost always include clauses where you waive your right to sue or promise confidentiality in exchange for minimal concessions. Early settlements offered by universities are typically far below the true value of a case.
   • What to do instead: Crucially, do NOT sign anything from the university or any organization without having an experienced attorney review it first.

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

   • What families often think: “I want people to know what happened to my child and warn others.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Anything posted online is immediately captured by defense attorneys. Inconsistencies between social media posts and official statements can severely damage your credibility. Additionally, public posts can unintentionally waive your right to privacy or attorney-client privilege.
   • What to do instead: Document everything privately. Let your attorney advise on the timing and content of any public statements.

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

   • What organizations often say: “Just come talk to us before you do anything drastic,” or “Let’s work this out as a family.”
   • Why it’s wrong: This is often a tactic to pressure, intimidate, or trick your child into making statements that can be used against them later. Your child will likely be outnumbered and vulnerable.
   • 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 often promise: “We’re investigating; please let us handle this internally.”
   • Why it’s wrong: While university investigations are important, they are often slow, limited in scope, and primarily focused on protecting the institution. Evidence disappears rapidly, witnesses graduate and become unreachable, and crucial statute of limitations deadlines can pass. You risk losing the opportunity for real accountability.
   • What to do instead: Preserve all evidence NOW. Consult with a lawyer immediately, even while university processes are ongoing. The campus process is not a substitute for judicial accountability.

7. Talking to Insurance Adjusters Without a Lawyer:

   • What adjusters often say: “We just need your statement to process the claim quickly.”
   • Why it’s wrong: Insurance adjusters represent the interests of their policyholder (the fraternity, individual, or university), not yours. Recorded statements are often used to find inconsistencies or blame the victim. Early settlement offers are typically lowball.
   • What to do instead: Politely decline to speak with any adjuster and inform them, “My attorney will contact you.”

8.5 Short FAQ

• “Can I sue a university for hazing in Texas?”
  Yes, under certain circumstances. Public universities such as the University of Houston, Texas A&M, and UT Austin benefit from sovereign immunity, which can protect them from some lawsuits. However, exceptions exist for gross negligence, willful misconduct, and violations of federal laws like Title IX. Private universities like SMU and Baylor generally have fewer immunity protections. Every case is unique, depending on specific facts and the university’s actions. Contact Attorney911 at 1-888-ATTY-911 for a case-specific analysis.

• “Is hazing a felony in Texas?”
  Yes, it can be. While hazing is typically classified as a Class B misdemeanor under Texas law, it becomes a state jail felony if the hazing causes serious bodily injury or death. Individuals who fail to report hazing can also face misdemeanor charges. This means that severe hazing can carry serious criminal penalties in Texas.

• “Can my child bring a case if they ‘agreed’ to the initiation activities?”
  Yes, absolutely. The Texas Education Code § 37.155 explicitly states that consent is not a defense to hazing. Courts and the law in Texas acknowledge the immense peer pressure, power imbalances, and fear of exclusion that new members face, meaning true voluntary consent simply cannot exist in a hazing scenario. Your child is a victim regardless of what they may have said or felt they had to do.

• “How long do we have to file a hazing lawsuit in Texas?”
  Generally, a hazing lawsuit in Texas falls under a two-year statute of limitations from the date the injury occurred or the death happened. However, this period can sometimes be extended by the “discovery rule,” which applies if the harm or its cause wasn’t immediately known. In cases involving deliberate cover-ups or fraud, the statute may also be “tolled” (paused). Time is always critical in hazing cases because evidence disappears quickly, and memories fade. We urge you to call 1-888-ATTY-911 immediately to discuss your specific timeline.

• “What if the hazing happened off-campus or at a private house?”
  The location of hazing does not eliminate liability. Many major hazing tragedies, including the Pi Delta Psi retreat death (Chun “Michael” Deng) or the Sigma Pi unofficial house death (Collin Wiant), occurred off-campus. Universities and national fraternities or organizations can still be held liable based on their sponsorship of the group, their knowledge of off-campus activities, their duty of care, and the foreseeability of hazing occurring at such locations.

• “Will this be confidential, or will my child’s name be in the news?”
  The Manginello Law Firm prioritizes your family’s privacy. Most hazing cases are resolved through confidential settlements before going to trial. We can request sealed court records and negotiate specific confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements to protect your child’s identity and future. While public accountability is a goal, we balance this with your family’s need for privacy.

9. ABOUT THE MANGINELLO LAW FIRM + CALL TO ACTION

When your family faces the profound trauma of a hazing incident, especially one that impacts a student from Throckmorton County at a major Texas university, you need more than just a general personal injury lawyer. You need a legal team that understands how powerful institutions fight back—and how to win anyway. At The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, operating as Attorney911, we are just such a firm. From our Houston headquarters, we serve families throughout Texas, including Throckmorton County and its surrounding areas, with expertise in serious injury, wrongful death, and institutional accountability cases.

We know hazing cases are fundamentally different. They demand a nuanced approach that combines deep legal expertise with an empathetic understanding of the immense emotional toll they take on victims and families. Our firm is uniquely qualified because we bring inside knowledge and complex litigation experience to every case.

One of our greatest strengths comes from attorney Lupe Peña. As a former insurance defense attorney at a national firm, Lupe understands exactly how fraternity, university, and other organizational insurance companies value (and often undervalue) hazing claims. She knows their delay tactics, their coverage exclusion arguments, and their settlement strategies because she used to run their playbook. This invaluable insider perspective allows us to anticipate their moves, counter their arguments, and maximize compensation for our clients.

Furthermore, managing partner Ralph Manginello brings extensive experience in complex litigation against massive institutions. Our firm was one of the few Texas firms involved in the BP Texas City explosion litigation, a monumental case against a multi-billion-dollar corporation. This experience, coupled with deep ties to federal court practice in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, means we are not intimidated by national fraternities, universities, or their well-funded defense teams. We have taken on powerful defendants and won; we know how to fight for what’s right, regardless of the size or influence of the opponent.

We also have a proven track record in multi-million dollar wrongful death and catastrophic injury cases. We don’t settle cheap; we build cases that force accountability and truly reflect the lifetime impact of severe harm. This includes working with economists to value complex losses, securing expert testimony for brain injury and organ damage cases, and ensuring that our clients’ futures are protected. Ralph’s membership in the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA) further underlines our dual expertise, allowing us to advise on both the criminal charges that may arise from hazing and the civil litigation for compensation. This is critical when hazing involves both victim and perpetrator liability.

Our investigative depth is unparalleled. We know how fraternities, sororities, Corps programs, and athletic departments actually operate behind closed doors. This means we know how to uncover and preserve crucial evidence, from obtaining deleted group chats and social media evidence with digital forensics experts, to subpoenaing national fraternity records showing prior incidents, and uncovering university files through discovery and public records requests. We investigate like your child’s life depends on it—because it does.

Ultimately, our firm is driven by a mission of empathy and victim advocacy. We know this is one of the hardest things a family can face, whether you’re in Throckmorton County or a bustling city. Our job is to get you answers, hold the right people accountable, and help prevent this from happening to another family. We focus on thorough investigation and real accountability, not just quick settlements. We provide clear, objective advice, backed by decades of experience, to help you understand your legal options and make the best decision for your family’s healing and future.

Call to Action for Throckmorton County Families

If you or your child experienced hazing at any Texas campus – whether it was at Texas A&M, UT Austin, the University of Houston, SMU, Baylor, or another institution – we want to hear from you. Families in Throckmorton County and those throughout the surrounding region have the right to answers, accountability, and justice. 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, and help you decide on the best path forward.

What to expect in your free consultation:

• We’ll listen carefully and empathetically to your story.
• We’ll review any evidence you’ve gathered (photos, texts, medical records).
• We’ll explain your potential legal options: criminal reporting, civil lawsuit, both, or neither.
• We’ll discuss realistic timelines and what to expect from the legal process.
• We’ll answer all your questions, including how our contingency fee structure means we don’t get paid unless we win your case. (Watch our video explaining contingency fees: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcI_j6F7Nc)
• There’s absolutely no pressure to hire us on the spot. Take your time to decide what’s best for your family.

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

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

Whether you’re in Throckmorton County, Houston, or anywhere across Texas, if hazing has impacted your family, you don’t have to navigate this complex and painful situation alone. An experienced attorney can review your specific facts, explain your rights under Texas law, and help you understand your options. Call us today.

Legal Disclaimer

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

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

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

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