The Greek community works diligently to eliminate hazing; these efforts are laudable and effective.  However, the plaintiff’s bar has consistently tried to use these anti-hazing efforts as the linchpin to an argument that by enacting these very same anti-hazing efforts, the national organization has somehow become a guarantor of every individual’s well-being.  That is not reasonable, or fair when considered.

In Yost v. Wabash, the Court recognized this fundamental tension, stating “ we recognize the untenable situation that can be created when colleges and fraternities attempt to deal with potentially dangerous activities by promulgating rules, only to have the enactment and enforcement of those rules thrown back at them as an assumption of duty.”  (p.36).  This is an absolutely correct analysis.  The idea that a national fraternity assumes a duty of care to each of its members by virtue of prohibiting dangerous conduct cannot be the rule of law.  I find it refreshing that this Court agreed.

The opinion also contains an analysis of the Indiana hazing statute.  The discussion of hazing itself and whether the activity in this case (forcibly taking pledge into shower) legally constituted hazing turned on an interpretation of the Indiana hazing statute.   In this case, the statute requires that the activity be forced upon the victim as a condition of membership.  This is not required in other states.  Based upon this statutory definition, and the developed facts, the showering activity was simply not imposed as a condition of membership.

Click here for an article from the Indiana Lawyer analyzing the case.

Back in college, Frederica Wilson earned the nickname the Haze Buster while serving as a regional director for her sorority, Alpha Kappa Alpha.

Looking at the college hazing problem today, she says “it’s almost as if the college campuses give a license to kill, inadvertently, without meaning to.”

Wilson, a Democratic congresswoman representing South Florida, planned to introduce a bill—the Halting Hazing Act of 2012—last month amid an anti-hazing event scheduled in Washington, D.C. She aims to make hazing a federal offense resulting in the loss of financial aid to students involved.

A District Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit against the University of Idaho filed by the parents of a student who fell from a fraternity window three years ago.

Amanda Andaverde, then a 19-year-old sophomore, suffered debilitating injuries when she slipped from an upper-story window and fell 25 feet to the concrete below at the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity. Her parents were seeking damages, and recently offered to settle the case for $1 million. The university declined.

In a written decision, 2nd District Court Judge Michael Griffin granted the UI’s motion for summary judgment to dismiss the claim. Griffin said the university did not have what the law calls a “special duty to aid or protect” Andaverde under the circumstances of the case.

“The plaintiffs have not presented sufficient evidence, even when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, to establish that the University owed a duty to Ms. Andaverde,” Griffin wrote. “Without such a showing the plaintiffs’ claim of negligence would not be meritorious.”

Warren Dowdle, the Boise attorney representing Andaverde, said a decision on whether to appeal will be made after consultation with her family.

Legal claims against Andaverde’s former sorority, Delta Delta Delta, the fraternity, and several unnamed individuals are still pending. Dowdle declined comment on the future of those actions.

In a hearing earlier this month, Dowdle argued the UI was liable for Andaverde’s injuries because it oversees the campus Greek system, and works with it on safety issues. Dowdle also said the university encourages students to live in fraternities and sororities, has the ability to enforce sanctions against them, and maintains policies against underage drinking.

Lewiston attorney Ted Creason, representing the university and co-defendant the Idaho State Board of Education, argued the UI can’t control the lives of its students. He said Andaverde was acting as an adult when she chose to consume alcohol on the night of her fall, and the parties she attended were in privately owned Greek residences.

Griffin cited those arguments in his decision.

“The court concludes that there are no genuine issues of material fact, and that the University and Board of Education did not have legal duty, nor assume a duty to protect Ms. Andaverde from consuming alcohol, or protect or keep her safe from any unsafe living conditions at the SAE sleeping porch on the night of September 9th and the early morning of September 10th, 2009,” he wrote.

Let the debate begin.  As pointed out in this piece, rankings are always debatable…..

Congratulations to the top-ranked fraternities as ranked by Newsweek and the Daily Beast!

Congratulations to the top-ranked sororities as ranked by Newsweek and the Daily Beast!

A University of Idaho attorney says the school can’t control what students do on private property outside of school hours, and so it can’t be held liable for injuries a 19-year-old sophomore sustained when she fell out of a fraternity window after a party.

Lewiston attorney Theodore Creason presented the school’s arguments in 2nd District Court on Wednesday, asking Judge Michael Griffin to throw out a lawsuit from former student Amanda Andaverde and her parents.

Andaverde broke several bones and was seriously injured in 2009 when she rolled off a bed at the Sigma Alpha Epsilon house and fell out of a window, striking the concrete almost 30 feet below. Though she was underage, Andaverde had been drinking and should have been prevented from doing so by older fraternity and sorority members, the lawsuit states.

A very nice article about the value of the Greek experience….