*South Dakota* Is a general contractor vicariously liable for the negligence of their subcontractor for damage to property?

[sb2015cc]

What is the name of your state? South Dakota

Is the general contractor liable for the negligence of their subcontractor for damage to property?

 

[not2cleverRed]

Well, the general contractor contracted the subcontractor directly, right?

If the negligent subcontractor doesn't have adequate insurance or assets to remedy the situation, shouldn't the general contractor do right by their client? It's not the client's fault that the general contractor hired the subcontractor.

 

[adjusterjack]

What is the name of your state? South Dakota

Is the general contractor liable for the negligence of their subcontractor for damage to property?

Depends on the circumstances.

What are the circumstances?

And who are you in those circumstances?

 

[sb2015cc]

Depends on the circumstances.

What are the circumstances?

And who are you in those circumstances?

I am the person who hired the contractor. The contractor then contracted with the subcontractor to complete some of the work. If it was determined that the subcontractor was negligent in their work causing property damage, would the general contractor be vicariously liable for damages? I'm assuming there's indemnity provisions in the contract between the general and sub, but would liability automatically fall on the general since they are the ones that contracted with the sub?

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Sue them both.

 

[Litigator22]

What is the name of your state? South Dakota

Is the general contractor liable for the negligence of their subcontractor for damage to property?

What is the name of your state? South Dakota

Is the general contractor liable for the negligence of their subcontractor for damage to property?

If you are you asking if the prime contractor is "vicariously" liable for the negligence of its subcontractors, the answer is no. Meaning not in the literal sense of the adverb whereby the negligence of an independent subcontractor is unconditionally imposed upon the prime or principal contractor as a matter of law.

In this regard the relationship of prime and subcontractor (where the latter is an independent entity) is not comparable to that of an employer/employee where the doctrine of respondeat superior applies charging the employer with the consequences of its employees' negligence or willful misconduct.

What follows is that the prime contractor enjoys a degree of immunity from the mishaps of its independent subcontractors. However, that immunity is not absolute! There are exceptions. And those exceptions are varied and numerous depending on the nature of the work called for by the project, its innate hazards, the responsibilities placed upon the prime contractor in fulfilling the work required by the project, the care required in selecting subcontractors and the degree of control over the subcontractors.

You ask about South Dakota. I can't tell you about South Dakota or even if its courts have ruled on the subject.

 

[adjusterjack]

I am the person who hired the contractor. The contractor then contracted with the subcontractor to complete some of the work. If it was determined that the subcontractor was negligent in their work causing property damage,

Was there damage? What kind? How did it happen?

What conversations have you had with the contractor and his sub about the damage?

You shouldn't just come here asking hypothetical questions without details because the answers (as you can see) won't do you a bit of good, except maybe PayrollHRGuy's advice to sue them both.