Design professionals occupy a unique position in the construction litigation world. They are commonly intertwined in complex project issues because they are professionals who owe a broad duty to many and because they are the drafters of the design who provide services during construction when the design comes to life. In addition to being exposed to liability for observed construction errors, design professionals are often sued for the negligence of their professional consultants. For example, an owner can sue its architect not only for architectural design issues, but for design errors of the architect’s structural design consultant.
The architect’s knee-jerk reaction may be “how can I be responsible for the structural design when I am not a structural engineer?”
Unfair as it may sound, at least one federal court in the Middle District of Florida ruled this way when applying Florida law. In the 2010 case Lillibridge Health Care Services, Inc. v. Hunton Brady Architects, P.A., et al., the Court found that an owner can successfully pursue a breach of contract claim against the architect for the negligent acts committed by the architect’s engineering consultant.[i]
The architect in Lillibridge separately contracted with an engineer for the engineering design.[ii] The owner discovered code violations and other errors in the engineering plans. The owner then sued both the architect and the professional engineer for breach of contract and professional negligence due to the engineering issues. However, the Court found that the owner could only pursue its breach of contract claim against the architect because of the architect’s contractual obligation to provide all of the drawings including architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing drawings.[iii]
The Lillibridge Court ruled that the architect was not personally at fault as the engineer committed the errors and that the architect was “entitled to rely on the expertise” of a professional engineer.[iv] Despite this acknowledgement, the Court still found that the architect breached its contract because the architect “obligated itself contractually to provide architectural and engineering services, and its duties as to engineering arise from the contract.”[v] The architect was found to be directly and financially responsible to the owner for the engineering errors, and could only pursue the engineer through an indemnification claim.
Lillibridge has dispelled the myth that design professionals are only responsible for their design. Therefore, design professionals should be mindful of the legal effect of contractual relationships they enter into with design consultants. At the very least, design professionals should ensure that the provisions within their subcontracts are clear, concise and legally appropriate to provide the broadest protections possible. In addition, design professionals should always ensure that their consultants maintain appropriate insurance coverage. Without these protections, the design professionals could be left holding the bag for errors committed by their consultants.
Relevant Links or Resources:
[i] See generally Lillibridge Health Care Services, Inc. v. Hunton Brady Architects, P.A., 2010 WL 3788859, Case No.: 6:08-cv-1028-Orl-28KRS (M.D. Fla. Sept. 24, 2010).
[ii] Id.
[iii] Id. at *13. The Court dismissed the owner’s negligence claims against the engineer because the errors involved the litigation arose from “obligations imposed by the contracts and not from any other source.” Id. at *15.
[iv] Id. at *16.
[v] Id. at *19.
- Partner
Amanda B. Buffinton is a partner in the Tampa office of Shutts & Bowen LLP, where she is a member of the Construction Litigation Practice Group.
A Martindale Hubbell AV® Preeminent™ rated attorney, Amanda is also Board Certified in ...
Search Blog
Subscribe Today
Follow Us
Recent Posts
- Pith? Perfect for Lienors, Not So Much for Landlords: Protecting Rights When Improvements Are Made to Commercial Tenancies
- Risks & Rewards of 3D Printing in the Construction Industry
- Back to (Construction) Work after COVID
- Drones in the Construction Industry
- COVID-19 Stimulus Relief and the Construction Industry
- PFAS Liability Litigation and the Construction Industry – Act Now or Pay Later
- How Evolving Technology Is Disrupting the Construction Sector
- Remaining Vigilant: Hurricane Planning in the Construction Industry
- COVID-Confusion: Force Majeure and Executive Orders
- Top Florida Legislation Affecting the Construction Industry in 2020
Popular Categories
- Construction Litigation
- Construction
- Construction
- Contracting
- Business of Real Estate
- Landlord-Tenant
- Liens
- Real Estate Law
- Business
- Contracts
- General Liability
- Compliance
- Technology
- Florida Public Contracts
- Litigation
- Venue
- Insurance
- Privacy
- Technology
- Statute of limitations
- Statute of repose
- Liens
- Florida Procurement
- Florida Public Procurement
- Public procurement
- Damages
- Contracting
- Federal Government Contracting
- Florida Government Contracts
- Public Contracts
- Regulatory Compliance
- Small Business
- Design Professionals
- Forum Selection
- Attorneys' Fees
- Offers of Judgment
- Prevailing Party
- Settlements
- Designer Liability
- Business
- Regulation
- Evidence
- Expert Science
- Unlicensed Contracting
Editors
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Of Counsel
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
Archives
- August 2023
- November 2022
- July 2021
- June 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- December 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- January 2018
- November 2017
- October 2017
- August 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016