July 2021: Topics include transportation risks, wildfires, mental health, & COVID-19.

January 2021: Topics include planning safer events during COVID-19, COVID-19 employment and vaccine questions and more.

May 2021: Topics include mental health, Covid-19 vaccine, and housing agreements.

Use the Chapter House Self-Inspection checklist to review your property and life-safety risk management.

A sorority chapter was having a co-sponsored event with a fraternity chapter on campus in hopes of raising funds for the fraternity’s philanthropy. The event was held at the fraternity chapter house. Some of the fraternity members setup a make-shift slip-and-slide using tarps and spikes. The individuals that setup the slip-and-slide did not push the spikes all the way into the ground. The sorority chapter women had nothing to do with the design of the slip-and-slide.

About twenty minutes after the event started, a non-member guest went down the slip-and-slide and severely injured her leg on one of the spikes that was sticking up from the ground. The claimant’s estimated medical expenses are nearly $40,000. The claimant’s attorney has requested a settlement of $300,000 from the fraternity and sorority in question and has threatened further legal action if that amount is not paid to the claimant within 30 days.

The fraternity’s insurance company plans to offer the claimant a settlement of $100,000, and the sorority’s insurance company has offered to contribute twenty percent of the proposed settlement amount (equal to $20,000) to the fraternity’s insurance company.  

This claim demonstrates that your chapters, volunteers and members can still be named in lawsuits even when they had little to do with an injury occurring other than co-sponsoring said event. In this case, if the sorority had inspected the slip-and-slide and realized the danger that the metal spikes posed (as well as the risks associated with a makeshift slip-and-slide, in general), the injury may have been prevented. This claim demonstrates that your chapters, volunteers and members can still be named in lawsuits even when they had little to do with an injury occurring other than co-sponsoring said event. In this case, if the sorority had inspected the slip-and-slide and realized the danger that the metal spikes posed (as well as the risks associated with a makeshift slip-and-slide, in general), the injury may have been prevented.

Two members attended a semi-formal event in which alcohol was served by a third-party vendor. Both members were over 21 and reportedly had been drinking at the event. It is believed that they were walking home from the party and became disoriented and lost. One member tripped and fell as she walked into the street. The other member tried to help her up, when they were both struck by a car. One member was killed and the other member sustained serious injuries.

At this point, no charges have been filed against the sorority; however, the statute of limitations in the state in question has yet to expire.

A member attended a party at an “unofficial” chapter house.  The “unofficial” chapter house was actually an apartment, in which four chapter members lived together.  The apartment came to be known on campus as your organization’s chapter house.  The member was very intoxicated, and some other chapter members arranged for a fraternity chapter member to drive her home.  The fraternity chapter member accidentally ran over her as he was backing out of her driveway. 

In the discovery process of the claim, it was revealed that a traveling consultant from the national organization had visited with this specific chapter the week before.  The plaintiff’s attorney found evidence that the traveling consultant had participated in drinking games with the chapter members.

The insurance company settled the claim on behalf of the plaintiff for just under $1M.

One of the more challenging exposures of writing a women’s fraternity or sorority is keeping the insurance and risk management recommendations “contemporary” to the changing dynamics of a campus women’s organization.  As the size of the chapter increase in membership numbers, more and more sorority sisters are gravitating to alternate housing where several of them may live together.  On those campuses where sorority chapter houses are not as common and/or a sorority does not physically have a chapter house, it has been common for some of the sorority sisters to secure housing together.

Irrespective of the reason, the number of “living arrangements” outside of a traditional chapter house is increasing and are being referred to and/or being considered by the campus community as the “X Sorority” chapter house.  We refer to these locations as unofficial houses.

These unofficial houses pose a number of problems to the national organizations and, ultimately, to the insurance coverage.  The concerns include the following:

We have seen a significant increase in claims that are coming from those locations that are not the actual chapter house, but instead from these unofficial houses.

We have identified this concern to your national leadership.  We also know that, as a volunteer, you are more apt to be aware of the existence of these types of housing arrangements.  Should you have one of these types of arrangements on your campus, we would ask that you bring it to the attention of your leadership.  Upon their review, we have encouraged them to involve us, if needed, in addressing the housing situation specifically.

Members of a sorority loaned their house to a men’s fraternity for a party. The men’s fraternity house was being painted, and they were unable to have a party at their own house. The sorority members did attend the party, but did not provide the alcohol. An underage member of the men’s fraternity was leaving the house when he fell down the front steps, which resulted in him losing his vision in one eye. The young man was intoxicated when he fell.

A lawsuit was filed in the matter against the fraternity and sorority, as well as some of their members. The allegations against the sorority included allegations of failure to supervise their patrons which resulted in the plaintiff being served alcoholic beverages until he was visibly intoxicated. Allegations against the sorority members included failure to supervise and control the fraternity members.

The lawsuit settled for $190,000. The insurance carrier for the sorority paid $154,500. The remaining amount was paid by the member’s personal homeowner’s policy. We do know that the men’s fraternity contributed towards the settlement. However, we do not know the settlement amount.

The defense costs for this claim totaled $329,223. This was a very expensive claim to defend due to individual members being named and additional coverage investigations into whether or not the members were acting on behalf of the sorority.

A member was injured while climbing onto the sorority’s homecoming float. The member was walking along side the float with other members. The float was towards the back of the parade and was starting to fall behind. The walkers were instructed to board the float to speed up the procession. While the member was boarding the float, the driver accelerated. The member was wearing a toga that became entangled in the axle. The member’s body became locked in the axle of the trailer. It is alleged that the member was dragged for 110 feet. The member suffered severe and permanent injuries due to the accident.  

A lawsuit was filed naming the University, the City, the driver of the float and the Sorority. The young man who drove and owned the truck and the trailer in which the float was built on had liability limits of $100,000. The City was dismissed from the lawsuit and the University was on the verge of being dismissed based on sovereign immunity. The driver of the truck argued that he was acting as an agent of sorority and the sorority should be vicariously liable for his actions which were allowing individuals to sit in the truck and block the view of the trailer and accelerating before accounting for the whereabouts of the participants. Defense Counsel felt that there was a good chance the sorority would be found to be vicariously liable for the driver’s actions.  

The lawsuit settled during mediation for $1,500,000.   

A member was injured at a chapter event when she stepped on a piece of glass that was on the dance floor and sustained a laceration to her foot. There was a sign posted at the bar stating that no glass bottles were to be taken onto the dance floor. It was discovered that the chapter did not have a chaperone at the event even though their manual stated that a chaperone should be present at all events. It was argued that had the chapter followed its own policy and had a chaperone at the event, the chaperone would have been there to enforce the rule of no glass bottles on the dance floor.

While there were other factors involved, the argument regarding the chapter not following their policy factored into the decision, and the insurance company settled the claim on the organization’s behalf for $187,500.

The chapter hired two buses to take their members and guests to and from an event. One bus had security, but the senior bus did not. On the senior bus, a fight broke out between two members’ boyfriends. One of the young men sustained a broken nose, as well as other facial fractures during the fight. It was confirmed by using Facebook that alcohol was being consumed on the bus.

The claimant’s attorney alleged that the chapter did not provide the property security. He argued that if one bus had security, the other one should also and if it did that his client would not have been injured in a fight. The claim settled for $37,500.