Michael Ryan v. TCI Architects/Engineers/Contractors, Inc. and BMH Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Craft Mechanical
2017 Ind. LEXIS 310
Ind.2017Background
- TCI (general/design-builder) contracted with Gander Mountain using DBIA Form No. 530/535 for store renovations and agreed to implement and monitor site safety, designate a Safety Representative, and exercise control over means/methods of construction.
- TCI subcontracted work to Craft, which subcontracted sheet-metal work to Romines; Michael Ryan (Romines employee) fell from a ladder at the site and was seriously injured.
- Ryan sued TCI and Craft alleging they owed a non-delegable contractual duty to provide a safe worksite; Ryan moved for partial summary judgment on duty; TCI cross-moved for summary judgment on duty, breach, and causation.
- The trial court denied Ryan’s motion but granted TCI’s, dismissing duty; the Court of Appeals affirmed by majority; Ryan petitioned for transfer to the Indiana Supreme Court.
- The Indiana Supreme Court reviewed the DBIA Form No. 535 language (Section 2.8) and other contract provisions and concluded TCI expressly assumed a non-delegable duty to implement and monitor safety for all individuals on site.
- The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for TCI, granted Ryan partial summary judgment on duty, and remanded for factual issues (breach, causation, damages).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a general contractor assumed a non-delegable duty of care to subcontractor employees via the TCI–Gander Mountain contract | Ryan: Form 535 (§2.8) expressly assigns responsibility for implementing/monitoring safety, designating a Safety Representative, and exercising control — evidencing intent to assume duty | TCI: Contract language does not create a specific duty; general rule precludes liability for independent contractor negligence | Held: Contract language (taken as whole) affirmatively demonstrates TCI’s intent to assume a non-delegable duty to keep the site reasonably safe; duty exists |
| Whether extrinsic evidence or subsequent subcontracts can negate the duty found in the TCI contract | Ryan: Duty determined by the TCI contract’s four corners; subsequent subcontracts irrelevant | TCI: Subsequent subcontracts and the usual allocation to subcontractors show no assumed duty | Held: Four-corners rule controls; the TCI contract unambiguously imposed the duty, so subsequent subcontracts do not alter it |
| Whether contract interpretation should follow Court of Appeals precedent comparing similar DBIA-type clauses | Ryan: Language aligns with cases recognizing assumed duties | TCI: Analogies to Court of Appeals cases finding no duty should control | Held: Decision grounded on state contract-interpretation principles applied to this contract’s language (not bound to Court of Appeals analogies) |
| Appropriateness of summary judgment on duty where contract interpretation is central | Ryan: No genuine issue as to duty — summary judgment appropriate on duty issue | TCI: Genuine factual disputes exist about intent/control and safety implementation | Held: As a matter of law, duty exists from contract language; summary judgment proper on duty, remand for factual issues of breach/causation/damages |
Key Cases Cited
- Bagley v. Insight Commc'ns Co., L.P., 658 N.E.2d 584 (Ind. 1995) (general rule that principal is not liable for independent contractor negligence, but contract can impose a specific duty)
- Goodwin v. Yeakle’s Sports Bar & Grill, Inc., 62 N.E.3d 384 (Ind. 2016) (elements of negligence and duty are questions of law)
- Wellpoint, Inc. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburg, PA, 29 N.E.3d 716 (Ind. 2015) (standard of review for summary judgment and contract interpretation principles)
- Stumpf v. Hagerman Const. Corp., 863 N.E.2d 871 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (contract can create a duty when it shows intent to assume safety responsibilities)
- Capitol Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Gray, 959 N.E.2d 294 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (similar DBIA-style contract language can support finding a general contractor assumed safety duties)