In Hunt Construction Group, Inc. v. Garrett, the Indiana Supreme Court set forth the circumstances pursuant to which a construction manager may be held liable for injuries sustained by an employee of a subcontractor.   

In Hunt Construction Group, Garrett was an employee of a subcontractor working on the construction of Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis.  Hunt Construction Group was the construction manager.  Garrett was injured while working at the job site.  Garrett sued Hunt Construction Group seeking compensation for her injuries.  The Indiana Supreme Court explained that a construction manager may be held liable for injuries suffered by a subcontractor’s employee when the construction manager owes the employee a duty of care:  (1) imposed upon the construction manager by a contract to which it is a party; or (2) assumed such a duty through conduct outside the terms of a contract. 

The court first reviewed the contract between Hunt and the stadium authority wherein Hunt took on certain safety responsibilities.  The court concluded that all of these responsibilities undertaken by Hunt were for the sole benefit of the stadium authority.  Furthermore, the relevant contracts provided that subcontractors were to be solely responsible for their own safety programs and precautions, and Hunt’s responsibility to review these programs did not require Hunt to take control over acts or responsibilities of subcontractors.  Accordingly, the court determined that Hunt did not assume a duty of care to the injured employee Garrett by virtue of Hunt’s contract with the stadium authority. 

The court then considered whether Hunt assumed by its actions or conduct a legal duty of care for job site safety.  The court acknowledged that Hunt’s contract imposed certain responsibilities on Hunt related to safety, and that Hunt engaged in these responsibilities.  The court noted that these responsibilities were similar to those between the owner and the construction manager in Plan-Tec, Inc. v. Wiggins, 443 N.E.2d 1212 (Ind. App. 1983) wherein the Indiana Court of Appeals found that the construction manager could be held liable for injuries to a subcontractor’s employee.  The court distinguished the facts and circumstances by noting that in Plan-Tec the construction manager engaged in activities beyond that which were set forth in the construction manager’s contract with the owner.  In contrast, Hunt engaged only in activities which it had a contractual obligation to do pursuant to its contract with the stadium authority.  The court wrote “we hold that for a construction manager not otherwise obligated by contract to provide job site safety to assume a legal duty of care for job site – employee safety, the construction manager must undertake specific supervisory responsibilities beyond those set forth in the original construction documents.” 

The decision in Hunt Construction Group may be read for the propositions that a construction manager may undertake responsibilities for job-site safety. However, to avoid liability to subcontractor employees, the construction manager should ensure that the contact provides that the construction manager is engaging in these activities solely for the benefit of the project owner, and then the construction manager should only engage in those activities specifically set forth in the contract.