Construction Risk
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Personnel
      • J. Kent Holland (Principal)
      • William R. Chambers
      • Joanne Dekker
      • Julia A. Holland
      • Gail S. Kelley
      • Timothy J. Mains
  • Casenotes Report
    • Newsletters (2010-current)
    • Newsletters (1999-2010)
    • Newsletter Videos
    • Topics
  • Design and Construction Contracts
    • Reasonable Contract Clauses
    • Indemnification Clause
    • Limitation of Liability Clause
    • More Contract Topics
  • CLE Video
    • Contract Topics in 1 Minute
    • Contracts for Design Professionals
    • Design / Build Lessons Learned
    • Jobsite Safety Responsibility and Liability
    • Working on Purpose
  • CLE Written
    • Books
    • Webinars on Construction Risk Management
    • Setting & Achieving Goals
    • Design Professional Litigation 2016
    • Design Professional – Contract Review Workshop
    • Lessons Learned 2016
    • Design-Build Risk Management
    • Design Professional Litigation 2015
    • Jobsite Safety Responsibility Litigation Lessons Learned
    • Managing Design Professional Risks
  • Contact
Select Page

ConstructionRisk Report (June 2022)

Inside this Issue

  • A1 - Contract Clauses – Short Videos (2 minutes each) on Risk Allocation for Key Contract Clauses
  • A2 - Construction Manager may be liable to worker who fell through skylight
  • A3 - Equitable Indemnity Denied where Indemnitees could not prove they were not at fault

Article 1

Contract Clauses – Short Videos (2 minutes each) on Risk Allocation for Key Contract Clauses

See similar articles: Contract Clauses – Short Videos (2 minutes each) on Risk Allocation for Key Contract Clauses | Kent Holland | kent Holland you tube

If you haven’t visited my YouTube Channel to see short videos I have prepared discussing key issues in contracts, do it now!

Click on videos and see a list of about 80 videos I have done.  Some are 20 minutes long.  But most of them are quite short and address only a single contract clause.

 

This article is published in ConstructionRisk Report, Vol. 24, No. 5 (June 2022).

Copyright 2022, ConstructionRisk, LLC

Article 2

Construction Manager may be liable to worker who fell through skylight

See similar articles: Construction Manager may be liable to worker who fell through skylight | Scaffolding law | Site Safety | supervisory control

A worker was injured when he fell through a skylight opening in a roof on which he was working.  He alleged common-law negligence and violation of the New York Scaffolding Act against the construction manager (CM) and project owner.  Appellate court held, on the issue of violation of the labor law, CM was a “contractor” under the labor law where it had power to enforce safety standards and choose contractors to perform the work.  Additionally, the CM may be vicariously liable as an agent of the property owner where it was the manager with ability to control the work.   Summary judgment could not be granted to the plaintiff, however, because the Court found CM raised a triable fact whether it lacked authority to supervise and control the work.

Summary judgment was granted, however, against the project owner failing to provide adequate fall protection as required by the labor law, and that is what caused the injury.  On the issue of common-law negligence, however, the court held CM established it didn’t exercise supervisory control over the manner or method of plaintiff’s work that caused the injury and it was therefore entitled to summary judgment on that count of the complaint.  Tansley v. LCO Building LLL and Cityview Construction Management, LLC, 201 A.D.3d 1323 (N.Y. 2022).

 

About the author: Article written by J. Kent Holland, Jr., a construction lawyer located in Tysons Corner, Virginia, with a national practice (formerly with Wickwire Gavin, P.C. and now with ConstructionRisk Counsel, PLLC) representing design professionals, contractors and project owners.  He is founder and president of a consulting firm, ConstructionRisk, LLC, providing consulting services to owners, design professionals, contractors and attorneys on construction projects.  He is publisher of ConstructionRisk Report and may be reached at Kent@ConstructionRisk.com or by calling 703-623-1932.  This article is published in ConstructionRisk Report, Vol. 24, No. 5 (June 2022).

Copyright 2022, ConstructionRisk, LLC

Article 3

Equitable Indemnity Denied where Indemnitees could not prove they were not at fault

See similar articles: Construction Defect | Equitable Indemnity Denied where Indemnitees could not prove they were not at fault | Indemnification clause | indemnity | premises liability

Owner of a tract of land (Wilevco) leased the land to a general merchandising store (Fred’s), and Wilevco then hired a contractor who constructed a new store.  Five years after construction, a shopper fell on a curb in front of the main door to the store. This occurred because there was a several inch drop in the concrete at the curb.  At trail, the judge granted summary judgment to the owner and the store against the construction contractor on the basis of equitable (“common-law”) indemnification on the theory that the accident was due to construction defect.  This was reversed on appeal because the two Indemnitees failed to prove that they were without fault. Specifically, they owed a duty of care to the store invitee and failed to paint the curb yellow or otherwise warn the customer of the unsafe condition.

NOTE: The court provides an excellent definition of indemnification as follows: “Indemnity is that form of compensation in which a first party is liable to a second party to pay a second party for a loss or damage the second party incurs due to a third party.”     Fountain v. Fred’s, Inc. and Wildevco, LLC, 871 S.E.2d 166 (South Carolina, 2022).

The shopper filed a premises liability suit against the landowner and the store owner asserting that they breached their duty to invitees by failing to maintain and inspect the premises and failing to discovery and make safe or warn of unreasonable risks.  She sustained serious injuries as a result of her fall on the sidewalk curb.  In defending against her claim the two defendants filed third-party claims against the contractor that constructed the sidewalk.  Before trial, the case between the plaintiff and the defendants settled.  Those defendants then continued with their litigation against the contractor for equitable indemnity to recover what they paid the plaintiff in the settlement.

At trial the court determined that the contractor had deviated from the plans and specifications in building the curb they way he did.  Relying exclusively on construction defects case law, the court concluded that neither the property owner or store owner breached any duty to the customer regarding inspection and maintenance because the court found “the defects were such that could not reasonable have been discovered.”

In reversing the trial court, the appellate court held that construction defect law was not appropriate for determining the duties owed in this case. Instead, the court explained that the principle of equitable indemnification has long been recognized in the state, and that a key element to this indemnity is “the absence of fault by the party seeking equitable indemnification.  A party is not entitled to equitable indemnification if any ‘negligence of his own has joined in causing the injury.”

In this case, the court stated that for the defendants to prove they were without fault and thus entitled to equitable indemnity, they would have been required to demonstrate that the breached no duty of care to the invitee.  “To be entitled to equitable indemnity, … [they] were required to show not just that [Contractor’s] construction of the ramp was a proximate cause of the injuries but also that Respondent's failure to warn or remedy the unsafe condition was not a proximate cause.”

 

About the author: Article written by J. Kent Holland, Jr., a construction lawyer located in Tysons Corner, Virginia, with a national practice (formerly with Wickwire Gavin, P.C. and now with ConstructionRisk Counsel, PLLC) representing design professionals, contractors and project owners.  He is founder and president of a consulting firm, ConstructionRisk, LLC, providing consulting services to owners, design professionals, contractors and attorneys on construction projects.  He is publisher of ConstructionRisk Report and may be reached at Kent@ConstructionRisk.com or by calling 703-623-1932.  This article is published in ConstructionRisk Report, Vol. 24, No. 5 (June 2022).

Copyright 2022, ConstructionRisk, LLC

Search

Get the Newsletter

Subscribe to ConstructionRisk Report.

Subscribe

Connect

 LinkedIn YouTube RSS E-mail

Contract Guide for Design Professionals

Downloadable here

Recent Newsletters

ConstructionRisk Report (March 2023)
ConstructionRisk Report (February 2023)
ConstructionRisk Report (January 2023)
ConstructionRisk Report (December 2022)
ConstructionRisk Report (November 2022)

All Newsletters

  • Newsletters (2010-current)
  • Newsletters (1999-2010)

Risk Management Workshops

Cybersecurity: Protect Your Digital Assets & Online Presence

Ethics for Engineers

Design professional’s design duty to mitigate against extreme weather events

Risk Management of Code Compliance

Design Professional’s Design Duty to Mitigate Against Extreme Weather Events

QA/QC and Efficiency Tactics for Design Professionals

Lessons Learned 2017 Litigation

Sexual Harassment in the Workplace Webinar

AIA B101 – Comparing 2007 & 2017 Owner-Architect Agreement

Design Professional – Contract Review Workshop

Design Professional Litigation – Lessons Learned 2016

Design-Build Risk Management

Design Professional Litigation 2015

Life Skills Workshop Slides

Setting & Achieving Goals

Contract Clauses – Papers and Articles

  • Indemnification Clause
  • Limitation of Liability Clause
  • Professional Standard of Care
  • Duty to Defend
  • Do Not Agree to Defend
  • Economic Loss Doctrine: A Good Defense
  • Establishing Time Limits for Filing Suit
  • Liquidated Damages Clause
  • Pay IF Paid or Pay WHEN Paid
  • Third Party Claims Against Professional Consultants

IRMI Expert Commentary

Environmental - Kent Holland
Professional Liability - Ken Slavens, Husch Blackwell

Construction Risk Management

Papers and Articles

Connect

 LinkedIn YouTube RSS E-mail

Links

  • Contact
  • Disclaimer for Website Use
  • Disclaimer for ConstructionRisk.com Newsletter
Copyright © 2022 Kent Holland. All Rights Reserved.