Athens, Georgia Fraternity Hazing — What Kappa Sigma Did to a UGA Pledge, What Georgia Law Says About It, and What Your Family Can Do Right Now
You are reading this at a moment you did not choose. Your son — or your brother, or your student, or you yourself — went through something at a fraternity that put him in a hospital bed three times in a single week. A University of Georgia police detective swore out a search-warrant affidavit describing what happened, and the details in that affidavit are the kind that stop a parent’s heart: a young man coerced into consuming things until he vomited, repeatedly, to the point where he could not care for himself. Bobbing for pickles in a mixture of urine and vomit. Crawling in oil. Drinking “copious amounts of alcohol” and excessive milk until his body broke down. And when the police started asking questions, the chapter’s own president — the Grand Master — allegedly sent a message to every pledge with three words designed to bury the truth: “deny, deny, deny.”
We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We are a trial firm that takes Georgia cases, and right now we are actively litigating a $10 million hazing lawsuit against a university and a national fraternity in Harris County, Texas. The same dynamics at work here — the power imbalance, the coerced participation, the organized cover-up, the national organization that collected dues while its chapter ran a degradation assembly line — are what we are fighting in that case right now. We know this fight because we are already in it.
What we want you to know, first, before any legal analysis: your son’s desire to belong was weaponized against him. He is not to blame for his compliance. The fraternity’s actions were criminal, not “tradition.” And the window to preserve the evidence that proves it is closing — the GroupMe messages the Grand Master sent can be deleted with a few taps, and the fraternity’s damage-control machine is already moving.
What Georgia Law Calls What Happened — and Why It Matters More Than What the University Calls It
The University of Georgia may call this a “conduct violation.” The fraternity’s national headquarters may call it an “isolated incident.” Georgia law calls it something else entirely, and what Georgia law calls it is what controls your family’s rights.
Georgia criminalizes hazing. Under Georgia’s criminal hazing statute, it is a crime to subject a student to bodily harm or danger as a condition of initiation into a campus organization. The activities described in the detective’s affidavit — forced consumption to the point of vomiting, coerced ingestion of alcohol, physical degradation involving biological waste — are not “pranks” or “team-building.” They are the conduct the statute was written to punish.
“Welch advised that the pledge had been coerced on different occasions to consume things to the point where they were vomiting,” the UGA police detective stated in the affidavit. “Welch explained that the pledge was not able to take care of himself, to the point where he sought medical attention 3 times” within a week.
Georgia also follows a doctrine that turns a criminal violation into a civil right: when someone violates a penal statute designed to protect a class of people, the person harmed by that violation has a private cause of action. That means the same conduct that makes Kappa Sigma’s members criminally liable also makes them — and the organization behind them — civilly liable to your son for every dollar of harm that followed.
On top of that, Georgia permits punitive damages when conduct shows willful misconduct, malice, or a conscious indifference to consequences. A chapter Grand Master who allegedly sends a “deny, deny, deny” message to pledges after learning of a police investigation is not just obstructing — he is handing the plaintiff’s lawyer the single most powerful piece of evidence in a punitive damages case. That message is proof that the fraternity valued its secrets more than the pledge’s life.
The Defendant Stack — Who Is Actually Responsible, and How Far the Money Reaches
A fraternity hazing case is never one defendant. It is a stack, and each layer has its own insurance, its own lawyers, and its own strategy for pointing at the layer below. We go after every layer.
Kappa Sigma National Fraternity. The national organization sets the policies, collects dues, charters the chapter, and holds itself out to parents and students as the body that supervises Greek life. The FIPG (Fraternal Information and Programming Group) risk management guidelines — which the national is bound by — strictly prohibit every activity described in the affidavit: hazing, forced consumption of alcohol, forced consumption of food or other substances, and any activity that endangers a member’s health. The national’s defense will be that the local chapter acted independently. Our answer is that the national chartered the chapter, trained (or failed to train) its members, collected the money, and was on notice — through decades of hazing deaths at fraternities across the country — that its model produces exactly this harm.
Kappa Sigma UGA Chapter (Beta-Lambda). The local entity that organized, directed, and executed the rituals. The chapter is where the decisions were made — who would be hazed, how, with what, and when. Chapter funds may have been used to purchase the “hazing materials” (the alcohol, the milk, the oil, the pickles). Chapter minutes and financial records can prove that the hazing was not a rogue act by a few members but an organized chapter activity.
The Grand Master (Chapter President). Michael Gorinshteyn, identified in the search warrant as the chapter’s Grand Master, allegedly used GroupMe to direct pledges to “deny, deny, deny” when speaking with UGPD. This is individual liability for directing the hazardous activities and for obstruction of justice / spoliation of evidence. The message is also the centerpiece of the punitive damages case — it shows consciousness of guilt, organized concealment, and the same power dynamic that made the hazing possible in the first place. If the Grand Master could order pledges to lie to the police, he could order pledges to consume until they vomited.
Individual Fraternity Members. The specific members who coerced, forced, supervised, and failed to intervene are individually liable for assault and battery (the forced consumption and physical contact), intentional infliction of emotional distress (the degradation rituals), and, where the facts support it, conspiracy. Every person who handed your son a drink he was forced to consume, every person who watched him vomit and told him to keep going, every person who told him to lie about it afterward — each is a defendant.
The Evidence Clock — What Exists Right Now, Who Holds It, and How Fast It Can Legally Die
This is the section that decides whether your case is strong or impossible. The evidence in a hazing case is uniquely fragile because the proof lives in digital systems the defendants control and can erase.
GroupMe Messages and Metadata. The search warrant targeted the Microsoft GroupMe account of the Grand Master. GroupMe is a group-messaging platform, and the messages sent through it are the single most powerful evidence in this case — they show coordination, direction, and the “deny, deny, deny” obstruction instruction. GroupMe messages are stored on Microsoft’s servers and on individual users’ devices. A user can delete messages. A user can delete their account. The faster a preservation demand goes out, the more likely these messages survive. This is a high-risk, fast-dying record. The day you call us is the day the preservation letter goes out — not the week after, not after the fraternity’s alumni advisory board has had time to “clean things up.”
Medical Records (Three Hospital Visits). Three separate medical encounters in one week are not “going to the doctor.” They are a documented pattern of escalating harm. Each visit generated a triage note, a discharge summary, possibly lab work (blood alcohol level, electrolyte panel, toxicology screen), and a clinical assessment. These records establish the objective severity of what happened — they are the proof that the hazing was not “uncomfortable” but medically dangerous. These records are stable but require an immediate HIPAA release to obtain. We get that release signed the day you call.
UGPD Search Warrant Affidavits. The detective’s sworn affidavit — already filed with the court to obtain the search warrant — contains the findings of the investigation as it stood when the warrant was issued. This is a public record, but it can be sealed by a criminal court if the investigation moves to prosecution. We need to obtain and preserve the affidavit before any sealing order issues. High urgency.
Chapter Minutes and Financial Records. Did the chapter approve funding for the hazing materials? Did meeting minutes reference “pledge activities” or “brotherhood events”? The chapter’s own records can prove the hazing was an institutional activity, not a rogue operation. Medium risk — these are paper records that can be “lost” but are harder to delete instantly than digital messages.
The Clery Act Record. Under federal law (the Clery Act), UGA is required to track and report campus crimes, including hazing incidents. The university’s own hazing incident file — the one that triggered Director of Greek Life Joshua Welch’s report to police — is a record that the university holds and that federal reporting requirements force into existence. This record establishes that the university itself recognized the danger.
What Forced Consumption Does to the Body — and Why Three Hospitalizations in a Week Is a Medical Red Flag, Not “Partying”
Here is what the medicine says about what was done to this pledge. We lay this out because the fraternity’s first defense will be “he was drinking voluntarily” and “kids get sick at college” — and both of those arguments fall apart when you understand the physiology.
Forced alcohol consumption to the point of vomiting. Alcohol is a central nervous system depressant. When a person is coerced into drinking “copious amounts” rapidly, blood alcohol concentration (BAC) can climb faster than the liver can metabolize it. Vomiting is the body’s emergency pressure-release — it means the toxic threshold has been crossed. But the danger does not stop at vomiting: a person who vomits while intoxicated or semi-conscious can aspirate — inhale their own vomit — which can cause asphyxiation or aspiration pneumonia. Three hospitalizations suggest the pledge may have been approaching or experiencing acute alcohol poisoning, a condition that kills college students every year in this country. A forensic toxicologist can explain to a jury exactly what the pledge’s BAC likely was, what the physiological effects were, and why forcing someone to consume until they vomit is not “hazing” — it is a near-lethal act.
Excessive milk consumption. Forced consumption of large quantities of milk can cause acute gastric distress, electrolyte imbalance, and in extreme cases a dangerous condition called hypercalcemia (elevated blood calcium). More immediately, forcing someone to drink large volumes of any liquid after they are already vomiting destabilizes electrolytes — sodium, potassium — which regulate the heart. Three hospital visits in a week means the body was failing to recover between episodes. The pattern is not “partying.” It is repeated acute poisoning.
Bobbing for pickles in urine and vomit. This is not a “game.” Submerging someone’s face in a mixture of biological waste — urine and vomit — exposes them to pathogens and, more significantly, constitutes a deliberate act of degradation designed to humiliate. The medical harm here is primarily psychological, but the law does not rank psychological harm below physical harm. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires conduct that exceeds all bounds of decency in a civilized society — and a court is unlikely to find that forcing someone to put their face in urine and vomit falls within those bounds.
The cumulative toll. Three hospitalizations in seven days means the pledge’s body was not recovering between hazing episodes. Each time he was released, he was sent back — or felt compelled to return — to the same environment that hospitalized him. That cycle is the definition of “conscious indifference” to a person’s health, and it is the predicate for gross negligence and punitive damages under Georgia law.
The psychological injury. Hazing produces PTSD at rates that rival combat exposure. The DSM-5 recognizes that repeated exposure to aversive details of a traumatic event, combined with physical helplessness and loss of agency, produces the full symptom cluster: intrusive memories, avoidance, negative alterations in cognition and mood, and hyperarousal. The power dynamic — in which refusal means rejection from the group, social exile, and the loss of everything the pledge has invested — is the mechanism. A “cult dynamics” expert can explain to a jury why pledges do not simply leave, and why “he could have walked out” is not a defense.
The Power Imbalance — Why “He Chose to Participate” Is a Defense That Fails
The fraternity’s lawyers will argue that your son assumed the risk. They will say he chose to pledge, chose to show up, chose to drink, chose to stay. This is the oldest defense in the hazing playbook, and it fails for a reason that every honest psychologist and every court that has studied hazing already understands.
A pledge is not a free agent. He has invested weeks or months of his social identity, his friendships, and his self-worth into the promise of membership. He is surrounded by older, larger, socially dominant men who control his access to the group. He has been deliberately sleep-deprived, nutritionally destabilized, and stripped of normal decision-making autonomy through a systematic process designed to make him compliant. When someone in that state is told to drink until he vomits, the law does not treat his compliance as consent — it treats it as the foreseeable product of coercion.
Georgia follows a modified comparative negligence rule. Under that rule, your own share of fault can reduce your recovery, but it cannot bar it entirely unless you are 50 percent or more at fault. In a hazing case, the power imbalance, the coercion, and the organized nature of the activities make it nearly impossible for the fraternity to pin meaningful fault on the pledge. The Grand Master’s “deny, deny, deny” message makes it even harder — it proves the chapter knew what happened was wrong and chose concealment over concern. That is not the conduct of an organization that believed it had the pledge’s meaningful consent.
The GroupMe “Deny, Deny, Deny” Message — Why Three Words Change the Entire Case
We separate this from the evidence section because it deserves its own treatment. The allegation that the Grand Master of Kappa Sigma used GroupMe to instruct pledges to “deny, deny, deny” when speaking with the University of Georgia Police Department is, legally, three things at once:
Consciousness of guilt. You do not tell people to lie to the police about conduct you believe was lawful. The message is an admission — by the chapter’s own leader — that what happened was serious enough to require a cover-up.
Obstruction of justice. Directing witnesses to provide false information to a law enforcement investigation is obstruction. In a civil case, this conduct supports an adverse-inference instruction — the jury can be told to assume the worst about what the fraternity is hiding.
The punitive damages engine. Under Georgia law, punitive damages are available for willful misconduct, malice, or conscious indifference to the consequences. A leader who tells traumatized, hospitalized pledges to lie to the police is not acting negligently — he is acting with the specific intent to protect the organization at the expense of the victim. That is the textbook predicate for punitive damages. The message is the single piece of evidence most likely to turn a jury against the fraternity, because it shows what the fraternity values: its secrets, not your son.
What the Fraternity’s Playbook Looks Like — and How We Counter Every Move
We know this playbook because Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where claims like yours are priced, delayed, and devalued. He sat across the table from the people who do what the fraternity’s lawyers are about to do. Now he sits on your side.
Play 1: The “Alumni Advisor” Call. Within days, someone friendly from the fraternity — an alumni advisor, a “risk management” volunteer, or a national representative — will call the family. The voice will be warm. The message will be “we’re so sorry” and “we want to help” and “let’s handle this without lawyers.” The purpose is to get you talking, get you recorded, and get you to accept a quick check with a release before you understand what happened. Counter: Do not take the call. Do not sign anything. Do not discuss your son’s medical condition with anyone from the fraternity or its national organization. Every conversation is a potential statement against you.
Play 2: The “Pledge Was a Willing Participant” Narrative. The fraternity’s lawyers will build a file on your son — his social media, his texts, his prior drinking, anything that makes him look like he was “going along with it.” They will try to pin fault on him to reduce or eliminate the recovery. Counter: The power imbalance, the coercion, and the “deny, deny, deny” message destroy this narrative. We retain a “cult dynamics” expert who explains to a jury why compliance under these conditions is not consent.
Play 3: The Delay and the Clock. The fraternity’s lawyers know that GroupMe messages can be deleted, that chapter members graduate and scatter, and that the passage of time erodes both evidence and witness memory. They will file extensions, slow-walk discovery, and bet that you will get tired, settle cheap, or let the statute of limitations run. Counter: The preservation letter goes out the day you call. The discovery requests are tight and fast. We name the specific records — GroupMe, medical records, chapter minutes, financial records, the search-warrant affidavit — and we demand them before the defendants have time to “lose” them.
Play 4: The “National Didn’t Know” Defense. The national fraternity will argue it is not responsible for what a local chapter did. It will point to its anti-hazing policies and say “we told them not to do this.” Counter: The national chartered the chapter, trained its members (or failed to), collected dues that funded the activities, and held itself out as the supervising body. Decades of hazing deaths at American fraternities — including deaths from forced alcohol consumption — put every national organization on notice that its model produces this harm. “We had a policy” is not the same as “we supervised compliance.”
What This Case Is Worth
We are honest about case value because false promises are the fastest way to lose a family’s trust. Based on the facts described in the affidavit — three hospitalizations, biological-waste degradation rituals, a documented cover-up, and the organized obstruction of a police investigation — the analysis is as follows.
Economic damages include the costs of three separate hospitalizations (potentially involving emergency department visits, toxicology panels, gastric treatment, and observation), follow-up medical care, mental health treatment for PTSD and trauma, and any loss of the educational experience at UGA (including tuition, fees, and the loss of the semester if the student withdrew or was unable to continue).
Non-economic damages are significant and are the heart of the case: the physical pain of repeated forced consumption and vomiting, the psychological trauma of the degradation rituals, the PTSD, the loss of trust, the damage to the student’s educational and social trajectory, and the impact on the family.
Punitive damages are the primary value driver. Georgia permits punitive damages when the defendant’s conduct shows willful misconduct, malice, or conscious indifference to the consequences. The “deny, deny, deny” message — if proven — is the evidence that moves this case from ordinary negligence to the category where a jury punishes. The biological-waste rituals and the repeated hospitalizations (which show the chapter sent him back, again and again, after each medical crisis) are the conduct that makes a jury angry enough to send a message.
Based on comparable hazing cases and the specific aggravating factors here, the case value range is estimated from approximately $250,000 on the low end to well over $2,500,000 on the high end — with the high end driven by the “outrage factor” of the biological-waste rituals and the documented “deny, deny, deny” cover-up, which makes the fraternity a defendant a jury will want to punish. If the victim suffers long-term organ damage from toxic ingestion (such as liver effects from repeated alcohol poisoning or metabolic injury from forced consumption), a Life Care Plan would be necessary to project the lifetime cost of care, and the case value would increase accordingly.
These figures are estimates based on the publicly reported facts and general experience with hazing litigation. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes.
The First 72 Hours — What to Do Now, and What Not to Do
Medical first. If your son has not been fully evaluated — not just the three emergency visits, but a complete workup including a mental health assessment — get it done now. The symptoms of alcohol poisoning and electrolyte imbalance can persist or recur. PTSD symptoms may not fully emerge for weeks. Document everything. Keep every discharge instruction, every lab result, every follow-up appointment note.
Do not speak with the fraternity. This includes the local chapter, the national organization, alumni advisors, “risk management” volunteers, and any attorney who says they represent the fraternity. Do not sign any document. Do not accept any check. Do not agree to any “informal resolution” or “mediation.” Everything they say to you is designed to limit their liability, not to help your son.
Do not let your son speak with the fraternity. The “deny, deny, deny” message was directed at the pledges. If the fraternity can get your son to repeat the denial — in a text, in a phone call, in a social media post — they will use it to undermine the case. Your son should not communicate with any fraternity member about the hazing, the investigation, or his medical condition.
Preserve everything. Screenshots of GroupMe messages before they are deleted. Screenshots of any text messages. The names of every member present during each hazing episode. The dates and times of each hospital visit. Photos of any physical injuries. The pledge manual, the pledge class roster, any fraternity documents your son was given. Do not assume the fraternity will preserve its own records — the “deny, deny, deny” message tells you exactly what they intend to do with evidence.
Contact us. The preservation letter is the first weapon. It goes to the fraternity’s national headquarters, the local chapter, the Grand Master individually, and Microsoft (for GroupMe data) — all on the day you call. It freezes the evidence. It creates a legal record of what existed. And if anything is destroyed after that letter is on file, the jury can be told to assume the worst about what was lost. Call 1-888-ATTY-911. We are available 24/7. The consultation is free and confidential.
How We Build a Hazing Case — Step by Step
Here is what the case actually looks like from the inside, from the day you call through the day a jury hears it.
Week one: The freeze. Preservation letters go out to every defendant and every third-party data holder. We get the HIPAA release signed so we can pull every medical record. We obtain the UGPD search-warrant affidavit from the court file. We start identifying every witness — every pledge who was in that pledge class, every member who was present during the hazing, every medical professional who treated your son.
Weeks two through eight: The investigation. We work with a forensic toxicologist to reconstruct what your son’s body went through — the likely BAC levels, the electrolyte disruption, the cumulative damage of three hospitalizations in a week. We retain a “cult dynamics” expert who can explain to a jury why pledges comply and why “he could have left” is not a defense. We pull the chapter’s financial records to see if chapter funds purchased the hazing materials. We subpoena GroupMe metadata from Microsoft.
Discovery: The records that prove the pattern. Chapter minutes, disciplinary records, prior complaints (if any), the national fraternity’s anti-hazing training materials, the university’s hazing incident file, the Director of Greek Life’s internal communications. We depose the Grand Master under oath about the “deny, deny, deny” message. We depose every member who was present during the hazing. The depositions are where the cover-up unravels — because the same power dynamic that made the pledges comply during hazing makes them uncomfortable lying under oath.
The demand and the trial. The case is built. The medical records are in. The toxicology report is in. The GroupMe messages are in. The “deny, deny, deny” message is projected on a screen in front of a jury in the Western Judicial Circuit courthouse in Athens-Clarke County — twelve people who live in a college town, who understand Greek life, and who are increasingly intolerant of clandestine fraternity misconduct that puts students in the hospital. That jury decides what the fraternity owes.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue the national fraternity, or just the local chapter?
You can sue both — and you should. The national fraternity chartered the chapter, set the policies, collected the dues, and held itself out as the supervising organization. The local chapter executed the hazing. The Grand Master directed the cover-up. Each is a separate defendant with separate insurance and separate exposure. The national’s defense — “the local chapter acted independently” — is the starting position, not the end of the argument. Our active hazing litigation involves claims against both the university and the fraternity organization.
How long do I have to file a hazing lawsuit in Georgia?
Georgia’s personal injury statute of limitations is two years from the date of the injury. For hazing, the “injury” may span multiple dates (each hazing episode, each hospitalization), and the clock generally runs from the date of the harm. There may be arguments for a later accrual date based on the discovery rule — particularly if the full extent of psychological harm was not immediately apparent. But the safest approach is to assume the two-year clock is running from the date of the hazing and to act well before it expires. Do not wait. Evidence dies faster than the statute runs.
My son went along with the hazing. Can the fraternity blame him?
The fraternity will try. The power imbalance that defines pledging — social pressure, sleep deprivation, investment of identity, the threat of rejection — means the law does not treat a pledge’s compliance as meaningful consent. Georgia’s modified comparative negligence rule (50 percent bar) means even if the fraternity can pin some fault on your son, it cannot bar recovery unless it proves he was 50 percent or more responsible. The “deny, deny, deny” message makes that nearly impossible — it proves the chapter knew what it was doing was wrong and deliberately concealed it.
What if the GroupMe messages have already been deleted?
This is why speed matters — but deletion is not the end of the story. If the Grand Master deleted messages after a preservation letter was on file, the court can impose an adverse-inference instruction, meaning the jury is told to assume the deleted messages contained evidence harmful to the fraternity. If the messages were deleted before any preservation demand, Microsoft may still retain server-side metadata or message content for a period. And the UGPD search warrant — already executed — may have captured the messages before anyone had a chance to delete them. The search-warrant return and the police investigation file may contain what we need.
Will this become a criminal case, and does that affect my civil lawsuit?
The UGA Police Department investigation, the search warrant, and the detective’s affidavit suggest the criminal investigation is active. A criminal case and your civil case are separate proceedings — the criminal case is the State of Georgia v. the fraternity members; your civil case is your family v. the fraternity and its members. The civil case does not wait for the criminal case to finish. In some ways, a criminal investigation helps the civil case — the police have already done some of the evidence-gathering, and the search-warrant affidavit is a sworn statement of what the detective found. But the civil case has its own evidence, its own experts, and its own standard of proof.
My son is embarrassed and does not want anyone to know. Can we pursue this privately?
Yes. Civil lawsuits can be filed under pseudonyms (Jane Doe / John Doe) in certain circumstances, particularly where the plaintiff is a minor or where the nature of the harm involves sexual or degrading conduct that would compound the trauma of public disclosure. The “bobbing for pickles in urine and vomit” allegation — if proven — involves degradation of a kind that courts have recognized as warranting privacy protections. We can discuss the option of filing under a protective order or pseudonym. Your son’s dignity is part of the case, not a price of filing one.
What does it cost to hire Attorney911 for a hazing case?
We work on contingency. That means we do not get paid unless we win your case. The fee is 33.33 percent of the recovery before trial and 40 percent if the case goes to trial. The consultation is free. We advance the costs of the investigation — the experts, the records requests, the court filing fees — and those costs are repaid from the recovery. If there is no recovery, you owe us nothing for our time. This is not a promise of a result; it is a promise that you will not pay out of pocket to find out whether you have a case.
I am not sure my son’s hazing was “bad enough” to sue. Where is the line?
Three hospitalizations in one week is not a gray area. It is a documented medical emergency repeated three times. But even if your son was not hospitalized — if he was degraded, coerced, physically forced to consume things against his will, or psychologically traumatized — the law does not require a hospital visit to recognize harm. The question is not whether the hazing was “bad enough.” The question is whether the fraternity’s conduct was wrong, whether it caused harm, and whether the law provides a remedy. Call us. We will tell you honestly whether we think there is a case.
Who We Are — and Why This Firm Takes Hazing Cases
Ralph Manginello has spent 27-plus years in courtrooms, including federal court. He is the Managing Partner of Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. Before he was a lawyer, he was a journalist — he knows how to find the story the evidence tells, and he knows how to tell it to a jury. Ralph is currently lead counsel in the active $10 million-plus Bermudez v. Pi Kappa Phi / University of Houston hazing lawsuit in Harris County, Texas. That case — like this one — involves a fraternity, a university, a pledge who was harmed, and an institution that failed to protect him. We are not learning how to fight hazing from a textbook. We are fighting it now.
Lupe Peña spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where adjusters and their software decide how to deny, delay, and devalue claims exactly like yours. He knows the plays because he ran them. He knows how the fraternity’s insurer will set its reserve, how it will engineer the “friendly call,” how it will mine your son’s social media, and how it will bet that you will get tired before the evidence is secured. Lupe is fluent in Spanish and conducts full client consultations in Spanish without an interpreter. If your family prays in Spanish, we speak your language.
We are based in Houston, Texas, and we take cases in Georgia, working with local counsel and pro hac vice admission where required. We do not claim an office in Athens. We do claim the fight — and we bring it everywhere we are needed.
Our firm has recovered more than $50 million for injured clients. We hold a 4.9-star rating across more than 250 Google reviews. We answer our phone 24 hours a day, seven days a week — with live staff, not an answering service. When you call 1-888-ATTY-911 at 2 a.m. from a hospital waiting room or a kitchen table, a human being picks up.
If Your Son Was at Kappa Sigma — or at Any UGA Fraternity — Call Now
The evidence is dying. The GroupMe messages can be deleted. The chapter members are already talking to each other, coordinating their stories, and the “deny, deny, deny” instruction is not a suggestion — it is the fraternity’s operating procedure. Every day that passes without a preservation letter is a day the fraternity uses to make evidence disappear.
The call is free. The consultation is confidential. You will speak with an attorney, not a screener. And if we are not the right fit for your family, we will tell you honestly and point you to someone who is.
1-888-ATTY-911. Free consultation. No fee unless we win. Hablamos Español.
Contact us today. Your son went through something no one should have to survive. The least we can do is make sure it never happens to another family — and that the people who did it pay for what they did.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. This page is legal information, not legal advice. Contacting the firm is free and confidential.