Washington's highest court has ruled that Washington State University bears a legal duty of care toward Sam Martinez, a 19-year-old freshman from Bellevue who died following a 2019 fraternity hazing event involving excessive alcohol consumption. The decision returns a wrongful death lawsuit filed by Martinez's parents to King County Superior Court.
The 5-4 ruling in Martinez & Houtz v. Washington State University supports a January 2025 determination made by Division One of the Court of Appeals.
The court explicitly limited the scope of its ruling.
"We express no opinion as to whether WSU did or did not breach that duty," Justice Salvador A. Mungia wrote for the majority. "This appeal only addresses the issue of whether WSU owed Sam such a duty. We hold that it did."
Background of the Incident
Martinez, a graduate of Newport High School, had pledged Gamma Chi, the university's Alpha Tau Omega chapter, during the summer preceding his enrollment.
On the night of Nov. 11, 2019, pledges were summoned to clean the chapter's off-campus residence under the pretense of maintenance work as part of the annual "Big-Little" night, according to the court opinion. Each pledge was expected to consume an alcoholic beverage provided by an upperclassman "big brother." The group subsequently relocated to the chapter house approximately an hour later and continued drinking. Martinez passed away early the following morning.
Three days after the incident, WSU issued an interim loss of recognition to Gamma Chi, which was extended through May 2026. The national fraternity also revoked the chapter's charter.
Martinez's parents, Hector Martinez and Jolayne Houtz, initiated legal proceedings in 2020. King County Superior Court Judge Kristin V. Richardson granted WSU summary judgment in March 2022, determining that no duty existed. The family later settled with the fraternity defendants for an undisclosed sum, while WSU proceeded to seek review from the Supreme Court.
The Legal Question
The case centered on Restatement (Second) of Torts § 315(a), a provision that can impose a duty on a defendant maintaining a "definite, established, and continuing relationship" with a third party, provided the defendant has some ability to control that party's conduct.
The majority determined that both conditions were met. WSU has recognized Gamma Chi since 1911, and the two entities sign a Relationship Agreement annually.
In exchange for the university's name and trademark, contact information for incoming freshmen, and philanthropy funds, fraternities agreed to rules prohibiting alcohol at social events on chapter property and barring minors from drinking at chapter functions "regardless of the function's location."
A 2012 WSU presidential task force found Greek students, particularly first-year men, faced significantly higher risks of alcohol-related harm. The report noted that 18 of 18 Greek chapters had been sanctioned for an alcohol violation within a single year.
"It should surprise no one that a house run by young men and full of other young men, many away from home for the first time in their lives, is fertile ground for abusing alcohol and engaging in dangerous initiation rituals," Mungia wrote. "It was certainly no surprise to WSU."
A Divided Court
Chief Justice Debra Stephens and Justices Steven González and G. Helen Whitener joined the majority, along with Justice Pro Tempore Mary Yu. Justices Raquel Montoya-Lewis, Colleen Melody and Theodore Angelis did not participate.
Justice Pro Tempore Barbara Madsen authored the dissent, joined by Justices Charles Johnson and Sheryl Gordon McCloud and Justice Pro Tempore Tracy Staab.
A dissenting opinion filed by Judge Madsen contended that the current ruling conflicts with *Barlow v. State*, a 2024 precedent that restricted a university's legal liability to activities occurring on campus or under direct institutional oversight.
Madsen criticized the majority for equating Western State University’s authority to sanction fraternities for off-campus behavior with actual control over that conduct. She characterized the connection between the school and the organization as a standard contractual business arrangement rather than a unique supervisory relationship. To support this view, she highlighted language within the Relationship Agreement stating that the university does not direct, supervise, or control the specific activities of its chapters.
Following the remand, Western State University retains the option to challenge whether it failed to meet its duty of care and whether such a failure was the direct cause of Martinez’s death. The Attorney General’s Office served as legal counsel for the university, while the firm Schroeter Goldmark Bender represented the victim’s family in Seattle.