The Phone Call from Pullman: When a Washington University Must Answer for a Life Lost
The phone call no parent should ever receive often comes in the middle of the night from a 509 area code. It starts with a notification from a hospital or a coroner and ends with the realization that the son you sent to Pullman to build a future is never coming home. In the wake of the 2019 death of 19-year-old freshman Sam Martinez at the Alpha Tau Omega fraternity, a legal battle has reached the Washington Supreme Court that will decide if a university is just a landlord or if it carries a “special relationship” that makes it responsible for the safety of its students.
We represent families in their darkest hours, and we know that while no amount of money can replace a child, the legal system is the only tool we have to force institutional change. If your family is facing the aftermath of a fraternity tragedy, you are fighting a battle of law as much as a battle of facts. The university will argue that because the incident happened at an off-campus, private residence involving adult students, they are exempt from blame. We work to show that through their active promotion of Greek life—the “Go Greek!” banners, the official university stamps of approval, and the sanctioned recruitment events—they created the very environment that led to the harm.
Can a Washington University Be Sued for a Fraternity Death?
The central question before the Washington Supreme Court is whether a university owes a duty of care to protect students from foreseeable harm, even in off-campus situations. In this specific case, the Washington Court of Appeals has already found that a special relationship exists between the school and its recognized fraternal organizations.
“Because WSU has a special relationship with its recognized fraternal organizations, we conclude that it owed a duty to use reasonable care to control the fraternity and protect Sam from the foreseeable harms of fraternal hazing and alcohol misuse.”
This finding is the core issue of the current appeal. Under Washington law, a wrongful death claim lawyer must prove that the defendant had a legal duty to the victim, that they breached that duty, and that the breach caused the death. The school is relying on a 2024 decision to argue they cannot control the private conduct of adult students off-campus. However, we argue that hazing is not “private conduct”—it is a systemic, sanctioned, and highly predictable part of the Greek system that the university bolsters for its own benefit.
Sam’s Law and the Regulatory Framework in Washington
In the years following this tragedy, Washington enacted “Sam’s Law” (RCW 28B.10.904-907), which now mandates university transparency regarding hazing violations. This law forces schools to maintain a public record of all findings of hazing violations by social fraternities and sororities.
While this law provides transparency for future families, it also serves as a “paper trail of foreseeability” for those seeking justice today. When a university has a documented history of alcohol toxicity and hazing within a specific chapter—like the Gamma Chi chapter in Pullman—they cannot claim they were unaware of the risk. Federal laws like the Clery Act also require universities to report crimes on and near campus, further establishing what administrators knew or should have known before a “Big Brother” reveal night turned lethal.
The Liability Tower: Who is Responsible for a Hazing Death?
In a high-stakes insurance claim lawyer situation involving a state university and a national fraternity, we look at a multi-layered tower of liability:
- Washington State University: For failing to supervise recognized organizations and negligently misrepresenting the safety of the fraternity via its “stamp of approval.”
- Alpha Tau Omega National Fraternity: For vicarious liability for the actions of the local chapter and failing to enforce anti-hazing policies despite knowing the systemic risks of these “traditions.”
- Chapter Officers: For direct negligence in organizing, funding, and mandating a high-risk event involving the coerced consumption of lethal quantities of liquor by minors.
- The “Big Brother” Member: For direct negligence and potential criminal liability for providing alcohol to a minor and failing to seek immediate medical intervention.
WSU is a state institution covered by the Washington State Liability Account. National fraternities typically carry high-limit general liability policies, though they often have “hazing exclusions” that trigger secondary litigation over who is required to defend the case. We work through these complexities to ensure every available dollar of coverage is on the table.
Calculating the Value of a Stolen Life under Washington Law
Washington is a pure comparative negligence state, meaning the court looks at the percentage of fault for every party involved. In a student death case, the defense often attempts to characterize the victim as an “adult who made a choice.” We counter this by showing the extreme psychological coercion inherent in hazing rituals.
Under RCW 4.24.010, parents can recover for the loss of the “child’s love and companionship” and “injury to the parent-child relationship.” Because Washington generally does not allow punitive damages, the valuation of the case is driven by non-economic damages and the “loss of enjoyment of life.”
The case value range for a high-profile student death with institutional bad-faith elements typically settles for seven to eight figures.
* Lower End ($2,500,000): Often seen if the court limits the university’s duty, leaving only the fraternity as a defendant.
* Higher End ($15,000,000+): Achievable if the Supreme Court affirms the “special relationship” duty, holding the state’s self-insured risk pool fully accountable for systemic failure.
Survival actions (RCW 4.20.046) also allow the estate to recover for the victim’s own losses, including the physical agony of acute alcohol poisoning and the terror experienced before death.
The Evidence Clock: Prove the Case Before it Vanishes
The proof in a hazing case is often digital and highly perishable. We move to freeze these records before the university or the fraternity can cycle them out:
- Digital Communications: GroupMe, iMessage, and Discord threads between members prove the intent to force consumption and show the “tradition” of the event. This data is easily deleted during phone upgrades.
- University Disciplinary Files: We demand the full history of the Greek chapter to show WSU knew they were a “bad actor” prior to the incident.
- National Charter and Bylaws: These define the control the national organization exerted over the local chapter, which is central to proving vicarious liability.
- Autopsy and Toxicology: These provide the forensic proof of the blood-alcohol content and the exact timing of consumption versus the time of death, which can highlight a failure to seek medical help.
The Insurance Adjuster Playbook and Our Counter-Moves
When we take on these cases, we face the university’s risk managers and the fraternity’s specialized insurance defense teams. Their playbook is predictable, and Lupe Peña, a former insurance-defense attorney, knows these tactics from the inside.
- The “Adult Choice” Defense: They will argue your son drank voluntarily. Our Counter: We use expert testimony to explain the “mob mentality” and extreme social coercion used during hazing that strips a 19-year-old of free will.
- The “Off-Campus” Shield: They claim the university isn’t a babysitter for private homes. Our Counter: We present the university’s own marketing materials and “Go Greek!” campaigns that nudge students into these environments under the school’s banner.
- The Delayed-Care Lowball: They may argue he would have died even if they called 911 sooner. Our Counter: We work with trauma surgeons and toxicologists to prove that the window for life-saving medical intervention was wide open and was ignored.
First 72 Hours: A Roadmap for Families in Crisis
If you are currently in the first days following a loss, your actions now decide the future of the case.
- Do not speak to the university’s “investigators” or risk managers. They are not there to help you; they are there to build a defense for the school.
- Demand that all social media and group chats of the fraternity members be preserved.
- Contact the personal representative machinery. Under Washington law, a court must appoint a personal representative to bring a wrongful death case. We handle this process for our clients.
- Keep a log of every university official who contacts you. Their initial statements can often be used as admissions of knowledge later in the case.
Ralph Manginello has spent 27+ years in courtrooms and understands that these are “Legacy Cases.” Your persistence is what leads to laws like Sam’s Law, and this litigation is the final step in ensuring institutional accountability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a “special relationship” in Washington tort law?
A special relationship exists when one party (like a university) has a level of control over another (like a student organization) and encourages others to rely on that relationship. If the university promotes a fraternity as a safe, sanctioned part of the college experience, the law may find they have a non-delegable duty to protect students from known risks like hazing.
How long do I have to file a wrongful death lawsuit in Washington?
Generally, the statute of limitations for a wrongful death claim in Washington is three years from the date of the death. However, when suing a state institution like WSU, there are specific notice-of-claim requirements that must be met much sooner. You should check the current deadlines with a lawyer immediately.
Can we sue the national fraternity and the local chapter?
Yes. We typically pursue both. The local chapter officers are often directly negligent in running the event, while the national fraternity is reached through a theory of vicarious liability for failing to enforce safety standards they claim to uphold.
What if my son signed a waiver or code of conduct?
Fraternity waivers are often found to be unenforceable in hazing cases because a party cannot contract away liability for gross negligence or actions that violate public policy. Hazing is a crime in Washington, and you cannot waive your rights regarding criminal conduct.
What damages are available to parents?
Under Washington’s wrongful death statutes, parents can recover for the loss of their child’s love, companionship, and the parent-child relationship. You can also recover for the economic losses to the estate and the funeral expenses.
Is alcohol poisoning considered “hazing” under Washington law?
Yes. Under Sam’s Law and the broader RCW definitions, hazing includes any method of initiation or pre-initiation into a student organization that causes or is likely to cause bodily danger or serious mental or emotional harm. Forced or coerced alcohol consumption is a classic form of hazing.
Will we have to go to a trial in Pullman?
Not necessarily. Many high-profile institutional cases settle after the discovery phase or after a major appellate ruling (like the one currently pending at the Supreme Court). If the case does go to trial, a jury of residents from the local county would decide the outcome.
Can the university be held liable for an off-campus party?
The current Supreme Court case is deciding this exact boundary. The argument is that if the party is a “sanctioned” event or part of a “recognized” fraternity tradition that the university supervises and promotes, the “off-campus” location does not excuse the university’s negligence.
No Fee Unless We Win
We work on a contingency fee basis: 33.33% if the case is resolved before trial, and 40% if it goes to a trial. We don’t get paid unless we win your case, and we offer a free consultation 24/7 to help you understand where you stand.
If you are grieving and looking for answers, we are here to tell you the truth about the fight ahead. We work until the evidence is frozen and the people responsible are held to account.
Hablamos Español.
1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911)
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. This information is for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.
Attorney911 Home | Brain Injuries | Premises Liability | Our Team