The Journal of American Law is a peer-reviewed journal and the only one of its kind in the country. The Journal is a law review focused on important legal issues ranging from complex litigation to Supreme Court rulings.
Issue link: http://journaloflaw.epubxp.com/i/477043
44 Journal of American Law // Spring 2015 construction design professional who is assisting or representing the construction design professional in the performance of professional services on the site of the construction project. Te limitation of liabil- ity provided by this subsection to any construction design professional shall not apply to the negligent preparation of design plans or specifcations. Kansas—KSA § 44-501(d): Except as provided in the workers' compensa- tion act, no construction design professional who is retained to perform professional ser- vices on a construction project or any employee of a construction design professional who is as- sisting or representing the construction design professional in the performance of professional services on the site of the construction project, shall be liable for any injury resulting from the employer's failure to comply with safety stan- dards on the construction project for which compensation is recoverable under the work- ers' compensation act, unless responsibility for safety practices is specifcally assumed by contract. Te immunity provided by this sub- section to any construction design professional shall not apply to the negligent preparation of design plans or specifcations. In Edwards v. Anderson Engineering Inc., 166 P.3d 1047 (Kan. 2007), the Supreme Court of Kansas applied KSA § 44-501(d) and determined that the engineering company was entitled to immunity for injuries to employees of third parties on a construction project. Te court conducted a fac- tual analysis and determined that the company met all of the statutory requirements for immunity; however, summary judgment was not appropriate because there was a material dispute regarding whether the engineering frm's negligence in preparing the design plan was a proximate cause of the worker's injury. 10 Maine—39-A M.R.S. §104: A design professional acting within the course and scope of providing professional services during the construction, erection, or installation of any project or a design professional's employee who is acting within the course and scope of assisting or representing the design professional in the performance of design pro- fessional services on or adjacent to the site of the proj- ect's construction, erection, or installation is immune from liability for any personal injury or death occur- ring at or adjacent to such a site, if compensation is paid to the injured person or decedent's representative for the injury or death under this act, and the design 10 Edwards v. Anderson Engineering Inc., 166 P.3d 1047, 1056 (Kan. 2007). professional has no duty under a written contract to assume responsibility for construction site safety. Te immunity provided by this section to any design pro- fessional does not apply to the negligent preparation of design plans and technical specifcations. Except as provided by this section, any waiver, oral or written, express or implied, of the design professional's immu- nity granted by this section is void and unenforceable as a matter of law. Missouri—§ 287.150(5) R.S.Mo.: No construction design professional who is retained to perform professional services on a construction project or any employee of a construction design professional who is assisting or representing the con- struction design professional in the performance of professional services on the site of the construction project shall be liable for any injury resulting from the employer's failure to comply with safety stan- dards on a construction project for which compen- sation is recoverable under the workers' compensa- tion law, unless responsibility for safety practices is specifcally assumed by contract. Te immunity pro- vided by this subsection to any construction design professional shall not apply to the negligent prepara- tion of design plans or specifcations. Nevada—Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. §617.017(3): Te exclusive remedy provided by this section to a principal contractor extends, with respect to any occupational disease sustained by an employee of any contractor in the performance of the contract, to every architect or engineer who performs ser- vices for the contractor or any such benefcially in- terested persons. Oklahoma—85A O.S. §5(H): For the purpose of extending the immunity of this section, any architect, professional engineer, or land surveyor shall be deemed an intermediate or princi- pal employer for services performed at or on the site of a construction project, but this immunity shall not extend to the negligent preparation of design plans and specifcations. 11 Oregon —ORS §30.785: Liability of construction design professional for in- juries resulting from failure of employer to comply with safety standards. (1) A construction design professional who is re- 11 See also, Martinez v. Tyson Foods Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155514 (E.D. Okla. 2013).