Dow Chemical Co. v. Bright

Summary

The Supreme Court of Texas held that Dow Chemical did not owe an injured independent contractor employee a duty based on either contractual or actual control over the contractor's work. The court concluded that Dow's safety rules, safe-work permit system, and general authority to stop or prevent work did not establish control over the means, methods, or details of the work or constitute specific approval of the dangerous conduct. The court reversed the court of appeals and rendered judgment that the plaintiff take nothing.

Holdings

1. The court held that the Construction Contract did not impose a duty on Dow because it did not retain the right to control the means, methods, or details of Bright's work.
2. The court held that Dow did not actually exercise control sufficient to create a duty; mere promulgation of safety regulations, presence of safety representatives, and a safe work permit system did not establish actual control.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Dow owed Bright a duty based on contractual control over the independent contractor's work.
2. Whether Dow owed Bright a duty based on actual exercise of control over the independent contractor's work.

Disposition

reversed