Kansas City, Mo. — A Stilwell man has filed suit against a Kansas University fraternity over injuries he suffered at a party in September.
The Kansas City Star reported Friday that Matt Fritzie sued Phi Gamma Delta this week in Missouri’s Jackson County Circuit Court for unspecified damages.
Fritzie, a freshman pledge from Stilwell, was injured Sept. 17 after jumping into a homemade pool constructed of sandbags and a tarp at the fraternity house, 1540 La. The lawsuit alleges Fritzie was ordered to dive into the pool during the fraternity’s “Fiji Island” party and suffered “severe injuries, including permanent spine damage and paralysis.”
The lawsuit alleges that fraternity officials were aware of past problems with the annual Fiji Island party, and that national fraternity officials had specifically prohibited the building of any pools or ponds. The lawsuit also asserts that minors were allowed to drink alcohol during the party.
The Jackson County lawsuit filed this week names three defendants: the Phi Gamma Delta Chapter House Association, the fraternity’s national organization, and David R. Smith of Kansas City, Mo., who is a trustee and a member of the local fraternity’s House Corporation.
Attempts to reach Fritzie’s attorney and representatives of the fraternity on Friday were unsuccessful.
KU placed the fraternity on a two-year probationary period after finding that the fraternity violated KU’s Code of Student Rights and Responsibilities for hazing, though the university was not able to substantiate that the hazing resulted in physical injuries. As part of the probation, the fraternity will be alcohol-free through the 2011-12 school year and will not be allowed to have social events on chapter grounds through the spring 2011 semester. Social events were banned altogether for the fraternity during the fall semester. All chapter members were also required to complete community service hours.
KU officials in their report interviewed a person who performed a swan dive into a pool and was injured — a person, based on police and others’ description of events, believed to be Fritzie.
In that report, Fritzie alleged he was “ordered” to jump into the pool, but KU officials were not able to substantiate his claims.
The university was able to substantiate three forms of hazing: forcing students to wear costumes to the Island Party; forcing students to both clean the apartments of active members and fetch items at the whim of active members; and fostering an environment where underage drinking was permitted, encouraged or possibly forced.
Fritzie, after being treated for his injuries at KU Hospital, was transferred to Craig Hospital in Denver for further treatment. The rehabilitation facility admits only patients with serious brain or spinal cord injuries, a spokesman said.
Fritzie’s lawsuit was filed in Missouri because the fraternity conducts business there and the member of the chapter house association who focused on pledge treatment and education is based there, according to the lawsuit.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
deec (anonymous) says…
"Forced" as in held a gun to his head, or forced as in "if you don't do this pointless and dangerous thing, you can't be in our club"?
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
The power of peer pressure and group-think is very significant, especially when it involves teenagers and alcohol.
And for those who feel the need to join an exclusive group such as a fraternity, whether it's because your dad or favorite uncle was a member, or all your best friends are also joining, the hazing rituals are seen as a rite of passage, not pointless, dangerous and stupid.
Sadly, much of our economy and society is built around similar peer pressure and group-think, whether it's on Wall Street, in the military, in your local gated community, watching Fox News or listening to Rush Limbaugh, to name but a few examples.
CloveK (anonymous) replies…
Completely Agree. Well said
homechanger (anonymous) replies…
Group think such ad those sitting at home watching msnbc CNN and listening to algore rant about the religion of global warming.
Well said.
whats_going_on (anonymous) replies…
this.
Of course this can't take away all of personal responsibility in the matter, but group-think in all situations can be very very powerful, especially at that age.
bethann (anonymous) replies…
"if you don't do this pointless and dangerous thing, you can't be in our club" is to "force" a teenager - the desire to be part of the gang is simply too great
deec (anonymous) replies…
Then the teenager was poorly raised if he or she thinks peer pressure is worth endangering his or her life. And "because they won't like me" is NOT force. Unless this unfortunate young man was held down and alcohol poured into him, and then he was shoved or thrown into the pool, no force was used.
hail2oldku (anonymous) replies…
"deec (anonymous) replies…
Then the teenager was poorly raised if he or she thinks peer pressure is worth endangering his or her life."
You are either extremely naive or have never been a parent (or both). Even the kid with the best rearing will make stupid decisions because of peer pressure. And while he may not have been held down and force fed alcohol, the obeying of an authority figure (in this case an upper classman at the frat) means he is still being forced to do something that he shouldn't. Not to mention that he and the other pledges were apparently sleep deprived, which can lead to poor decision making as well.
I think the real reason they filed in JACOMO is to get away from everyone that has the frat/sorority mindset that this wasn't hazing and that he did everything of his own accord.
woodscolt (anonymous) replies…
might be a good "legal" point. However, the behavior associated with fraternities and their treatment of pledges may carry some implied liability.
pace (anonymous) says…
I wonder if the fraternity members will man up and speak the truth about that night of if they will keep their mouth shut or lie?
bigdaddy1 (anonymous) replies…
I'm sure they will keep there mouths shut because Mom and Dad spent alot of money to get them into the "CLUB"
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Tell the truth about what? Some idiot told another idiot to do something stupid? What's the big secret? Do you really think that this fraternity sanctioned some giant hazing ritual in front of hundreds of non members? Here's how it went:
Idiot 1: Hey pledge, dive into the pool.
Idiot 2: Ok.
If anyone thinks that a well liked pledge would be kicked out for not complying to an idiotic and unsafe "demand" by an active member, you are misinformed. Pledges are asked to leave because they are unliked by the fraternity.
bigdaddy1 (anonymous) replies…
were you present when this happened or were you one of the members that was aked to leave because they didn't like you?
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Neither but it sounds like you were. Your "mommy daddy" comments are so juvenile and idiotic. 50% of college kids get financial help from their parents. The Greek system only makes up for 5% of the student body.
ralphralph (anonymous) says…
Secret Little Boys' Club.
... the time may have passed.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
What deec said.
thebcman (anonymous) says…
at some point, logic has to kick in and say, "No, I won't risk my life to be in some stupid fraternity."
cheeseburger (anonymous) replies…
Amen. I don't condone the frat's behavior, but it does come down to personal responsibility.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Hey, watch it mister. No person is ever responsible for their own actions anymore. Don't believe me? Ask an attorney.
pace (anonymous) replies…
So the fraternity has no responsibility? They aren't to blame for their action?
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
No. The individual was not forced to dive. Some individual asked another individual to do something stupid and he complied. All the guy had to say was no and walk away.
pace (anonymous) replies…
lol, cool. Every crook, creep and nut case will love your reasoning. One person is responsible but the group of baby boys don't have any responsibility for how they act. cool. what is that thinking, magic?
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
How did the rest of the group act? Did this guy jump in or was he thrown in? What specifically did the "group" to make you think they are responsible for this persons sole action?
kusp8 (anonymous) replies…
....and if you don't believe them just ask any snot nosed teenager at any of the local High Schools.
rgh (anonymous) says…
All schools and snub clubs know that hazing is illegal. If indeed they told him he had to do the dive then I think it's justified (being a parent). If he simply jumped on his own then this is simply another bogus law suit and should be dismissed immediately. Too much litigation now instead taking ownership of our own mistakes.
bigdaddy1 (anonymous) replies…
obviously you don't have any children. He jumped into a pool that was illegal as well as the beer served to a minor and a party that was not authorized by the university RGH you are ignorant
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Actually, he helped build the illegal pool. He then chose to illegally consume alcohol. The he dove into the pool by his own free will.
Renaissance (anonymous) says…
College seniors must feel REALLY cool hanging out with Freshman. nothing says "I'm awesome" like feeding Keystone Light to an 18 year old.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Seniors do not typically hang out with Freshman. Like a dorm, most individuals hang out with the people in the same class. Have you ever been to a college party? Or any party for that matter? Is every one the same age at all parties past the 8th grade?
bigdaddy1 (anonymous) replies…
Larry where do you get all of your information were you at the party? oh that's right you were the one that the fraternity ask to leave.
tophawk87 (anonymous) says…
Men acting like boys...
missmagoo (anonymous) says…
"hat national fraternity officials had specifically prohibited the building of any pools or ponds."
This is what will win this lawsuit. An awful tragedy and probably a family left with mounting medical bills to pay for the current and lifetime care of this boy. It's too bad that no one at this party had a little more sense of responsibility.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Well stated.
bigdaddy1 (anonymous) says…
LarryNative sounds just like the rest of the intellectual liberals from Lawrence completely misinformed but very opinionated
bigdaddy1 (anonymous) says…
LarryNative sounds just like the rest of the intellectual liberals from Lawrence completely misinformed but very opinionated
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
I'm not sure why you would think I'm a Liberal. I'm pro fraternity, pro take responsibility for your own actions, and anti sue everyone for personal mistakes. Is that your definition of a Liberal? Maybe you need to Google "Liberal" and get back to me.
volunteer (anonymous) says…
How convenient for the folks bringing the lawsuit that a county known for being favorable to plaintiffs has an alleged nexus to the case. (or whatever the terminology is)
deec (anonymous) says…
Here's the thing. I got wasted and did a lot of stupid stuff when I was young. If I'd died doing said stupid stuff, it would never have occurred to my parents to sue. I have five kids. All but one are in their 20's. Some of them get wasted and do stupid stuff. If something happened to one of them while doing stupid stuff, I would be heartbroken, and might well consider suicide, but I would not consider suing.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
The human brain is not fully mature until sometime after age 22. One of the characteristics of that immature brain, especially among males, is to be very impulsive, which often leads to some very stupid choices.
And while I, like you, did a few stupid things when I was that age, I wasn't part of an institution that encouraged me to do so. Maybe that's one reason I survived that period of my life relatively intact.
So, yes, this kid does bear responsibility for his own stupidity, but the fraternity is also responsible for providing what was essentially institutional support for that stupidity.
bethann (anonymous) replies…
well stated
pace (anonymous) says…
As a child of parent who had 4 natural leaders, we were held responsible for what we did, including what we did that led other people to get into trouble, even if we didn't get hurt our self. We were held responsible if we convinced our babysitter that it was ok for us build a catapult , convince our cousins to fire cantaloupes at the neighbors cows. The baby sitter should of known better, but we did know better and we were held responsible. No free ride. Those "leaders" at the fraternity are responsible for their part of the party. We were responsible for our part, and according to my folks, the baby sitter and the cousins were not the most culpable, we were. If you raise your kid to think that as long as you can pass your responsibility to a victim you get a free ride/ You might get a guy with no record, but you won't get an adult.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
So if you have a party at your house and you decide to make a barn fire and one of your guests jumps in the fire and dies because someone who lives with you said to the person "Hey, jump in that fire." you are responsible. Is that your line of reasoning?
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
Umm, there is a difference between a swimming pool, into which billions of people jump into every year and survive intact, and a bonfire, which nearly every living creature knows enough to stay out of.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Ok. first of all, thanks for not mocking barn fire when I meant bonfire. Let's say a baby pool then. You buy a baby pool at Wal Mart and the person at your house dives in? Is that a better scenerio? These "pools" built in parking lots are as shallow as a kiddie pool and it is obvious. Escpecially since the guy who jumped in help build it.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
The pool in itself is somewhat irrelevant. What's relevant is what was going on otherwise. If you were serving alcohol to a bunch of kids (and 18-year-olds are still kids) and demanding that they do rather extreme things, such as diving head-first into a shallow pool, you most certainly could have some liability for the result.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
That's the problem. They were not serving alcohol. Minors were drinking their own illegally purchased alcohol. Also, their was no demand. Some idiot said jump in. All the kid had to do was so no.
bethann (anonymous) replies…
if minors were drinking their own illegally purchased alcohol on their premises weren't they (the frat) supposed to do something to halt the activity such as call the police on the minor?
pace (anonymous) replies…
No, that would not be an extrapolation of my reasoning. That would be a different discussion, few point would be similar to the topic. .Since that is not the same situation, and that is not what I said, It may be an example of what you think. If you want to say the fraternity leaders have no responsibility for their actions, just say that is how you feel. I don't agree with you.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
I dont feel the "fraternity leaders" had anything to do with the issue. The pledges built the pool and one of the guys who built the pool dove in. Seems pretty simple.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
It sounds to me that you've already established a set of the facts of the situation. If you are right that the pledges spontaneously build the pool of their own accord, with no direction from their older "brothers," and that the alcohol consumption was likewise purely the choice of the pledges, then I suspect a jury would find the fraternity to have no liability.
If, however, it can be established that the pool was the idea of the hazers, and not the hazees, and that alcohol consumption was encouraged or promoted by the elder members of the fraternity, then a jury could rule that there is liability.
begin60 (anonymous) says…
I do not understand why KU was unable to substantiate the physical injuries--seems like a tremendous evasion of professional and moral responsibilities on their part.
smot (anonymous) replies…
It is called HIPPA and restricts access of medical information. The inability to substantiate the physical injuries by KU is not an evasion of professional and moral responsibility.
begin60 (anonymous) replies…
Thank you for explaining. Likely you are right. Funny, though that KU follows or claims to follow this law when it is to their advantage, but will cruelly and ignorantly violate privacy laws when they are trying to avoid liability by framing and smearing the victims of their malfeasance--then lie about their wrongdoings and refuse to acknowledge any such incidents happened-- even deep-sixing police reports about the related incompetent STAFF hate speech. If it has been reported in the media that someone's at Craig (brain trauma hospital)--I mean, come on.
They apparently have no problem making smearing false allegations of racism and sending them to someone's boss before following required due-process policies as a retaliation for a legitimate complaint that the HR office has overstepped decent and legal privacy law--FERPA-- boundaries. I doubt they really know or understand the laws. I personally have luckily never before last year run into such complete, incompetent lack of ethics and professional care and responsibility at a university or anywhere else before. Mixed with the trademark local ignorance it makes for a fairly toxic cocktail.
deec (anonymous) says…
There's a big difference between an adult or adult surrogate like a babysitter not providing adequate supervision, and a group of adults who work together to have a party that goes horribly wrong. No one forced this young man to pledge the fraternity. No one as far as I know forced him to drink. If he was held down and booze poured into him, that's a different story. No one forced him to swan dive into the pool he may have helped build. If he was thrown in against his will, that's a different story. I think most people who join Greek houses are very well aware that a huge part of that culture revolves around alcohol use. It's a very sad situation for the young man to be permanently disabled, but he is no victim, except, perhaps, of his own behavior.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
This isn't an either/or situation. This kid is responsible for his stupid choices (which could even include wanting to join this fraternity in the first place,) AND the fraternity is also responsible for creating a dangerous situation and encouraging (demanding?) very risky behavior by drunken teenagers.
pace (anonymous) replies…
yup
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
Fritzie was part of the fraternity so he helped create the dangerous situation.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) replies…
He was a pledge in a hazing ritual. I seriously doubt that anything done that day was done at his direction.
smot (anonymous) replies…
Bozo:
A fraternity party with women in attendance is not when hazing occurs. Hazing is done in private where no nonmembers can see and report on what happens. Pledges and recruits to any organization are usually treated diffferently than active members.
LarryNative (anonymous) replies…
You are 100% incorrect about this being hazing. This was not hazing. Anything an individual does is by their own direction unless a gun is being pointed at their head. Peer pressure is not a defense in the eyes of our legal system.
Kash_Encarri (anonymous) replies…
What an idiotic statement.
smot (anonymous) says…
One can only assume the reason this lawsuit was filed in MO (in what is obviously a KS event) is that the plaintiffs figure the money is more easily obtained under the laws of that jurisdiction. This transfer of the trial to MO blows out any supposition that this case is about punishing the perpetrators of the injustice and makes it what it clearly is....a money grab. IF justice and punishment for the evil doers was what this lawsuit was about it would be in the state where it occurred. The FIJI Island party has been held annually for decades and has included a pool, costuming and pledges constructing various scenery props to set the ambiance of a tropical island. There are many such "themed" parties held annually by many organziations across the USA. It is tragic this injury has resulted from one of these props, a swimming pool. Diving into the shallow end of a swimming pool results in hundreds of spinal cord injuries annually in the USA and around the world. In spite of signs on permanent swimming pools that tell people not to dive....people still do it with regularity, with or without alcohol ingestion.
kernal (anonymous) says…
Basically what happened is a college student had too many beers and like most of his peers, thought he was immortal. Thus, the stupid idea to dive into the pool he helped build.
At that age, very few people have faced any type of danger or tragedy and have no idea of when to exercise caution. I think that is what happend with Fritzie. May he RIP and his family get real closure, because a law suit is not going to provide that.
kernal (anonymous) replies…
Good grief! I didn't read the end of the story! He lives! eek.
akt2 (anonymous) says…
The kid will probably never walk again. There is some liability to be assumed by the fraternity. I hope he receives some monetary gain.
mr_right_wing (anonymous) says…
I'm thinking this suit could be a first step. If this frat is found liable, then why not go after KU? This organization was recognized by the University of Kansas, it had the "KU stamp or approval" so it should be trustworthy and safe for KU students.
This will be very interesting to watch.
smot (anonymous) replies…
Mr. Right Wing:
You have what it takes to be a great trial lawyer and loot the remainder of the world for whatever you can make. Welcome to life in America....expand those potentially liable for any bad outcome and list them as a defendant. Hope for settlement out of court and move onto the next potential defendant.
mr_right_wing (anonymous) replies…
That's what my mom always tried to steer me towards. No thanks, I decided the thing for me was a career that has now become obsolete. Even if I didn't take her advice, I should have figured out a career to 'fall back on'.