Hunt Construction Group, Inc. v. Garrett
964 N.E.2d 222
| Ind. | 2012Background
- Garrett, an employee of Baker Concrete, was injured removing form work on Lucas Oil Stadium; Baker had a contract with Stadium Authority to perform concrete work; Hunt was the project construction manager under a contract with Stadium Authority and had no contract with Baker; Garrett sued Hunt for negligence seeking a duty of care for jobsite safety; trial court ruled Hunt could be vicariously liable; Court of Appeals reversed on vicarious liability and addressed whether Hunt owed a duty of care under contract or by actions; Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer and reversed, holding Hunt had no duty of care under contract or by actions; conclusion remands for proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hunt owed a duty of care to Garrett via contract | Garrett contends Hunt contractually assumed safety duty | Hunt argues no contractual duty to Garrett exists | No contractual duty; Hunt did not owe a duty to Garrett under the contract |
| Whether Hunt assumed a duty by actions beyond contract | Garrett relies on Plan-Tec-like actions (safety director, meetings, inspections) as assuming duty | These actions were within contract obligations and did not create a new duty | No assumption of duty by actions beyond contract; Plan-Tec distinction applied |
| Whether the construction manager can be liable for vicarious negligence of a subcontractor’s employee | Plan-Tec supports vicarious liability | No basis for vicarious liability where no duty exists | Court affirmed lack of vicarious liability due to absence of duty; remanded on other grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- Plan-Tec, Inc. v. Wiggins, 443 N.E.2d 1212 (Ind.Ct.App.1983) (construction manager duties depend on contract or assumed duties)
- Perryman v. Huber, Hunt & Nichols, Inc., 628 N.E.2d 1240 (Ind.Ct.App.1994) (construction manager duty may arise from contract; authority matters)
- Rhodes v. Wright, 805 N.E.2d 382 (Ind.2004) (premises-liability duty context cited in discussion)
- Young v. Tri-Etch, Inc., 790 N.E.2d 456 (Ind.2003) (contract limitations not applicable to nonparties (context))
- King v. Northeast Security, Inc., 790 N.E.2d 474 (Ind.2003) (duty tailored to contractual undertaking for safety)
- Stumpf v. Hagerman Constr. Corp., 863 N.E.2d 871 (Ind.Ct.App.2007) (construction contractor duties regarding safety authorities)
- Phillips v. United Engineers & Constructors, Inc., 500 N.E.2d 1265 (Ind.Ct.App.1986) (duty of care for jobsite safety discussed in context)