OLYMPIA, Wash. — The Washington State Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Thursday in the case that will decide whether Washington State University can be held liable in the hazing death of Sam Martinez in 2019.
Counsel for WSU petitioned the court to reverse an appeals court ruling from January that decided the university does bear some responsibility in Martinez’s death.
WSU freshman Sam Martinez died of acute alcohol poisoning after a 2019 fraternity event. His death, Pullman Police and WSU agreed, was the result of hazing at Alpha Tau Omega (ATO)’s Gamma Chi chapter.
In a lawsuit filed against the university in 2020, Sam’s parents argued the university was partially to blame for his death. Washington’s Court of Appeals agreed, ruling that ATO used an off-campus house, or live-out, to avoid WSU’s ban on alcohol, and that WSU knew of these events.
Now, WSU is appealing that decision, arguing that the university cannot control what a fraternity or its members do in off-campus events or housing.
In a brief filed with the court in August, WSU says that two separate agreements outline that the only power the university held over the fraternity was an after-the-fact, contractual ability to sanction Gamma Chi.
“When you’re off campus, away from campus security, away from administration, there is no ability to control those activities,” said WSU Counsel Nicholas Ulrich. “The university could not stop the fraternity from having activities at a live-out of one of its members in a preventative way.”
The counsel representing the Martinez family argued on Thursday that the university was aware of a history of hazing activity at fraternities, and specifically at ATO.
“They had a tremendous insight. They did have the power to dictate off-campus activities, the activities in the chapter house, and wherever the fraternity activities were occurring,” said Counsel Rebecca Jane Roe in her oral argument to the justices on Thursday.
Martinez’s counsel outlines in its response brief filed in August that the university’s existing preventative measures, such as the monitoring and enforcement of compliance with WSU’s Standards of Conduct and the university’s ability to issue sanctions for violations, show that the university is aware of some duty to protect its student safety.
The response cites that “the nature of WSU’s relationship with Gamma Chi was such that WSU had sufficient insight into the dangerousness of Gamma Chi’s conduct, could identify its potential victims, and could exercise sufficient control over Gamma Chi…”
There is currently no available timeline for when the Supreme Court may hand down a ruling.
트위터 공유: 워싱턴 대학 책임 논쟁 샘 마르티네즈 사망 사건 재판