Legal Gap for Injury Victims in Public School Districts in Texas

Sovereign Immunity & Public School Districts

In Texas, public school districts historically have enjoyed sovereign (or governmental) immunity, meaning they cannot be sued for many torts (such as negligence) unless the Legislature has specifically waived that immunity. In simple terms: if a student is hazed on a public school team, and the district failed to act, parents often cannot sue the district for ordinary negligence because the immunity shield stands. 

 

Why We Focus on Private Defendants (Fraternities, Private Schools, Private Leagues)

Because private organizations (private schools, Greek chapters, private clubs) do not enjoy the same blanket immunity protection as public school districts, they present a more direct route for accountability. When a fraternity or private league initiates dangerous hazing rituals, fails to supervise, or turns a blind eye to dangerous initiation behaviors, we at Rocky Walton Injury Lawyers are ready to hold them (and their insurance carriers) responsible. For instance, we have worked a case involving the tragic death of an 18-year‐old incoming freshman at a well‐known Texas university  as a result of an alcohol‐fueled hazing ritual. That case underscores how private entities and individuals can be pursued, including through home insurers of fraternity members when they are temporarily away at school. Congress.gov

The Exception: Public School Districts Are Changing (But Still a Gap)

However, the legal barrier is evolving. In 2025, the Texas Legislature passed House Bill 4623, which created Chapter 118 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code. Under this new statute, starting September 1, 2025, a public school district’s governmental immunity is waived in limited circumstances. Specifically, Chapter 118 provides that a school district may be liable if it is grossly negligent or reckless (or engages in intentional misconduct) in hiring, supervising, or employing a professional school employee who (1) commits sexual misconduct against a student, or (2) fails to report suspected child abuse or neglect. Damages are capped at $500,000 per claimant, and the statute abolishes official immunity for the professional school employee. This is a big step—but it still mainly applies to sexual misconduct/abuse by employees, not all forms of misconduct (like hazing, bullying, or sports‐initiation injuries) for which immunity remains largely intact.

 

The Celina Independent School District (Texas) Case: What Makes It Different

Consider the recent high-profile case involving Celina ISD. Families of young male athletes at Celina High School and its feeder middle school filed suit against Celina ISD and former school staff member. The allegations: A staff member secretly recorded nude or partially nude boys in the locker room, had prior improper student relationships, and the district allegedly knew about warning signs and reassigned him rather than firing him. The lawsuit contends the district was grossly negligent and reckless in supervising, retaining and employing the staff member, and failed to report prior misconduct — so under Chapter 118 the immunity waiver applies. Thus, this case does allow civil suit against the public school district under the new carved‐out exception for employee sexual misconduct. In short: Celina ISD is an exception to the usual immunity barrier — because the misconduct alleged is sexual abuse by an employee. What it does not automatically cover is hazing or bullying in athletics by students or coaches if the claim is only negligent, lacking a sexual abuse component.

 

What This Means for Hazing Claims In Public Schools

So, if a student on a public school football team is hazed — say forced to consume alcohol, endure humiliating initiation or unsafe conditioning — what are the legal options?

• If the hazing involves student misconduct or peer‐to‐peer hazing, and the claim is simply “the district did nothing,” the district is typically immune for ordinary negligence.

• If there is an allegation of sexual misconduct or educator misconduct (such as the Celina case) and the district is grossly negligent in hiring/supervising/reporting, then a claim against the district may be feasible under Chapter 118.

 

Our Experience: Fraternity Hazing

To illustrate our work: In the Debrick case, a beloved 18-year-old incoming freshman died in a hazing incident involving a fraternity at a Texas university. According to congressional remarks: “After being forced to drink a keg of beer in less than 30 minutes and half a handle of whiskey, Dalton was left in a room unconscious and covered in vomit… 911 wasn’t called until 3 hours later.” Congress.gov In that tragic scenario, the responsible parties were private fraternity members and private organizations—not a public school district—and so our legal team pursued liability via the home insurance policies of the fraternity members and the organization. That is the kind of case our website references when describing our “hazing injury” practice across private groups. This case demonstrates that when private-entity defendants are involved, we can hold them accountable—and that our firm has the experience to do so.

 

Rocky Walton Injury Lawyers’ Vision: Leveling the Playing Field

At Rocky Walton Injury Lawyers, we believe every student deserves safe participation in sports, clubs and organizations—free from hazing, bullying, unsafe initiation practices or exploitative conduct. Our firm is committed to representing victims of hazing when private groups are involved. We also urge legislative reform so that public school districts cannot continue to hide behind sovereign immunity when they fail to serve as student advocates. While Chapter 118 is a meaningful step forward, it doesn’t yet address all horrifying misconduct—especially non-sexual hazing and bullying in athletics. We are hopeful the law will evolve further so public school districts bear responsibility when they do not do more to protect students, supervise coaches, enforce anti‐hazing policies, and respond appropriately.

Until then, if your child has been hazed—whether in a fraternity, private school team, club, or youth sporting league and sustained serious injuries or death — call Rocky Walton Injury Lawyers for a free consultation. 

 

Conclusion

Hazing is dangerous, pervasive and too often minimized. At Rocky Walton Injury Lawyers, we focus on holding private organizations accountable for that conduct. In the public school context in Texas, sovereign immunity still largely protects districts—unless the misconduct involves sexual abuse by an employee and the district was grossly negligent or reckless in supervision. The Celina ISD case is one such exception under the new Chapter 118. Going forward, we will continue advocating for broader accountability so all unsafe initiation practices, hazing, bullying and sports misconduct can be addressed and remedied—regardless of whether the institution is public or private.