UT frat recruited with live sex shows, lawsuit claims

[g41965]

The Texas KA Chapter is powerful, old and has a large membership 150 + and 2300 alumni.They own a beautiful house at 2515 Leon, Austin Texas outright. If the alumni support the new group/local I think they can survive.
The University of Texas is a public university and cannot prohibit membership in the new local as this would violate the US and Texas Constitutional Right of free association. Several chapters in the south have disaffiated from their national/international including the SAE's at Duke and the Phi Delt's at U Va. and The University of The South, in an odd way this paralells what happened to greeks in New England in the late 1960's
I tend to think a purely local chapter without oversite is a risk management problem and the chapter will decline, but die outright, probably not.

[srmom]

Dudes, you're not getting a 100 year old house just because you're the current tenants. DUH.

The current tenants aren't getting the house, the house is owned by the UT Austin Alumni Advisory Board, and they are keeping the house. Your statement should read, "Dudes, you're not getting a 100 year old house that is privately owned just because you used to be affiliated with the organiziation that legally owns it outright."

I've got a son in that chapter, and while I'm not going to go into details -DON'T believe everything you read in the press, There is a "shock and awe" campaign going on by the national order.

Believe me when I tell you that the parents and alumni know everything going on. I've got reams of paperwork sent by the national order, the lawyers and the housing corp for the chapter. Both sides are keeping us all well aware of the goings on and legal proceedings.

Suffice it to say, that of all the families involved currently, throughout this whole mess, they've only lost one member, and they took a pledge class of 40 boys - sans membership with the national order. They are also a registered organization with the University of Texas, who saw no reason for suspension. So, yes, at this point I'd say they are a viable chapter.

The alumni are supporting the move to break with the order, in fact they felt it was the only way for the chapter to survive.

If what they were saying in the press was the whole story, do you think they would have been able to get liability insurance and have the full support of the alumni advisory board and parents?

[shirley1929]

Originally Posted by srmom

The current tenants aren't getting the house, the house is owned by the UT Austin Alumni Advisory Board, and they are keeping the house. Your statement should read, "Dudes, you're not getting a 100 year old house that is privately owned just because you used to be affiliated with the organiziation that legally owns it outright."

I've got a son in that chapter, and while I'm not going to go into details -DON'T believe everything you read in the press, There is a "shock and awe" campaign going on by the national order.

Believe me when I tell you that the parents and alumni know everything going on. I've got reams of paperwork sent by the national order, the lawyers and the housing corp for the chapter. Both sides are keeping us all well aware of the goings on and legal proceedings.

Suffice it to say, that of all the families involved currently, throughout this whole mess, they've only lost one member, and they took a pledge class of 40 boys - sans membership with the national order. They are also a registered organization with the University of Texas, who saw no reason for suspension. So, yes, at this point I'd say they are a viable chapter.

The alumni are supporting the move to break with the order, in fact they felt it was the only way for the chapter to survive.

If what they were saying in the press was the whole story, do you think they would have been able to get liability insurance and have the full support of the alumni advisory board and parents?

SrMom - was waiting for you to chime in! I thought I remembered you had a son in that chapter. They were a great group of guys when I was at UT and I
knew that they had tons of oversight from their local alumni base. I also read the original letter about the break-off that explained how the alumni were the ones pushing for the move. I thought that alone spoke volumes about what was coming down from KA Order nationals.

[rdogbob]

Srmom-

Well if there is another side of the story, Omicron's spokesman hasn't done a very good job of getting the message out. Basically it sounds like they dont feel like the internal judicial process at KA National should have held them to any punishment whatsoever.

I am curious though at this passage from the Austin paper:

"Alden, who said the suspension was two years and not the one reported in the lawsuit, said another reason the group sought to break off from the national group was because the national office ordered all students living in the fraternity house to find other housing. The house would have been foreclosed without the revenue, Alden said."

I understand that significant improvements were made few years ago to the manor, but I thought it was funded through the sale of land in West campus? How could they have lost the house?

[Kevin]

I'd be interested to see the lawsuit paperwork in this case. If KA Order HQ is making a claim for ownership of the real property of the chapter, I'd like to see the basis for such a claim. Fraternities are typically structured in a purposeful manner to shield the national organization's assets in the event of a major lawsuit. That's done by having independent housing corporations, not comingling chapter and HQ assets, etc.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'd be interested to see the lawsuit paperwork in this case. If KA Order HQ is making a claim for ownership of the real property of the chapter, I'd like to see the basis for such a claim. Fraternities are typically structured in a purposeful manner to shield the national organization's assets in the event of a major lawsuit. That's done by having independent housing corporations, not comingling chapter and HQ assets, etc.

Didn't you hear about these new-fangled one-way liability shields? SEE ALSO: "Piercing the Semi-Permeable Membrane"

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Didn't you hear about these new-fangled one-way liability shields? SEE ALSO: "Piercing the Semi-Permeable Membrane"

Yeah, I haven't heard of one of those.. Can you do that with an LLC? In my state we've come up with a number of different organization types (some using FOUR LETTERS!) maybe that's what those are? If such a creature exists, I need to form one of those.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Didn't you hear about these new-fangled one-way liability shields? SEE ALSO: "Piercing the Semi-Permeable Membrane"

Ug. When I saw Piercing the Semi-Permeable Membrane, my first thought was of Condoms and oil based lubricants.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by naraht

Ug. When I saw Piercing the Semi-Permeable Membrane, my first thought was of Condoms and oil based lubricants.

No, but those implements could serve as interesting metaphors for some corporate structures, so you're on the right track.

[AlphaFrog]

I understand the lawsuit including hazing and return of assets, but what does hiring strippers have to do with it? It may be a questionable activity, but it's not illegal to hire a stripper, unless there was a spesific clause about what chapter funds can be used for which wasn't mentioned in the article. Even so, you may be hard pressed to prove that the money came from chapter funds and not some member's pocket.


PS...why is striptease in my autocorrect but stripper is not...weird.

[ElieM]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

I understand the lawsuit including hazing and return of assets, but what does hiring strippers have to do with it? It may be a questionable activity, but it's not illegal to hire a stripper, unless there was a spesific clause about what chapter funds can be used for which wasn't mentioned in the article. Even so, you may be hard pressed to prove that the money came from chapter funds and not some member's pocket.

Maybe a violation of their stated organizational aim of striving to offer reverence to both God and women, as described in the motto, "Dieu et les Dames"

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by ElieM

Maybe a violation of their stated organizational aim of striving to offer reverence to both God and women, as described in the motto, "Dieu et les Dames"

Still not a legal issue. It's not like ASA could sue me for failing to aspire, seek, or attain.