Slip & fall · Subcategory
Construction Site Injury Cases
Construction-site injury cases in Texas are not ordinary premises files. They sit at the intersection of OSHA standards, the Chapter 95 limitation on property-owner liability, the contractor-versus-subcontractor allocation of duty, and the Workers' Comp bar, which sometimes blocks a claim against the injured worker's own employer but rarely blocks claims against the third parties on the job. The strongest cases are third-party-over-employee claims: a worker injured by another contractor's negligence, who collects Comp from his employer and then pursues the negligent third party for the rest.
OSHA standards as evidence of the standard of care
OSHA does not create a private right of action in Texas, but its standards (29 CFR Parts 1910 and 1926 for general industry and construction) are routinely admitted as evidence of the applicable standard of care. Fall-protection standards (1926 Subpart M), scaffolding standards (Subpart L), excavation and trenching standards (Subpart P), and electrical-safety standards (Subpart K) all show up in the recurring fact patterns we handle. OSHA citations issued for the incident itself, citation history on the same project, and the contractor's written safety plan all become exhibits. When OSHA cites a contractor for the violation that injured the worker, the citation does meaningful work on the negligence question even though it is not dispositive.
General contractor versus subcontractor: who owes what duty
Texas allocates duty on a multi-contractor site according to control. A general contractor that retains control over the means and methods of a subcontractor's work owes a duty of reasonable care for the safety of the subcontractor's employees. A general that hands off a discrete scope and stays out of the means and methods has a much narrower duty. Master subcontract agreements, daily safety logs, foreman testimony, and the actual on-site practice — not just the contract language — drive that analysis. The Texas Supreme Court's decisions in Redinger v. Living and successor cases set the framework, and the case-specific control question is litigated on every meaningful construction file.
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Chapter 95 and the property owner
When the defendant is the property owner (rather than a contractor) and the injured plaintiff was a contractor or contractor's employee performing work on an improvement to real property, Chapter 95 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code imposes additional hurdles: the owner is liable only if the owner exercised some control over the manner in which the work was performed and had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition. That standard is materially harder than ordinary premises liability and is the reason most serious construction cases focus on contractors rather than owners. Identifying the right defendant — and the policy behind that defendant — is the early work that determines the case.
Workers' Comp interplay and third-party-over-employee claims
Most Texas construction employers carry Workers' Compensation, which bars the injured worker from suing his direct employer in tort. The bar does not extend to other contractors on the job. A roofer injured by a scaffold company's negligent rigging collects Comp from the roofing employer and then sues the scaffold company as a third party. The Comp carrier asserts a subrogation lien against any third-party recovery, and managing that lien — through negotiation or under Texas's made-whole and common-fund doctrines — is part of every third-party case. Where the employer did not subscribe to Comp (a 'non-subscriber'), the injured worker can sue the employer directly under a negligence theory with significant procedural advantages.
Frequently asked
Questions Texas accident victims ask us
- If your employer carries Texas Workers' Compensation, the Comp system is your exclusive remedy against the employer itself; you cannot bring a tort claim against the employer for ordinary negligence. The bar does not extend to other contractors, equipment suppliers, or property owners. Most serious construction cases proceed as third-party claims against the contractor or vendor whose negligence actually caused the injury, while Comp covers medical and a portion of lost wages.
- Texas is the only state where employers can lawfully opt out of Workers' Comp; those that do are 'non-subscribers.' A non-subscriber employer loses important defenses in any injury lawsuit: contributory negligence, assumption of the risk, and the fellow-servant doctrine are unavailable. A worker injured by a non-subscriber's negligence can sue the employer directly with significant procedural advantages compared to either Comp or an ordinary negligence case.
- Yes, meaningfully. OSHA does not create a private cause of action in Texas, but OSHA standards are admissible as evidence of the standard of care, and citations are admissible as evidence of breach. A citation specifically tied to the violation that caused the injury is one of the strongest evidentiary documents available on the negligence question. The defense will argue the citation is not dispositive, but it shifts the case substantially.
- Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Chapter 95 limits the liability of a property owner to a contractor or contractor's employee working on an improvement to the real property. The owner is liable only if it exercised some control over the manner in which the work was performed and had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition. That standard is materially harder to meet than ordinary premises liability, which is why serious construction cases focus on contractors rather than owners; the contractor is usually the proper and more viable defendant.
- Texas courts apply a control test, primarily under Redinger v. Living and its successor cases. A general contractor that retains control over the means and methods of subcontracted work owes a duty of reasonable care to the subcontractor's employees. A general that hands off a discrete scope and stays out of the daily means and methods has a much narrower duty. Daily safety logs, master subcontract terms, and the actual practice on the site all factor in, and the question is usually litigated.
- When Comp pays your medical and indemnity benefits for a workplace injury caused by a third party's negligence, the Comp carrier has a statutory subrogation lien against any recovery you make from that third party. The lien can be negotiated down, often substantially, under Texas's common-fund doctrine (recognizing your attorney's work in creating the recovery) and made-whole considerations. Managing the lien is part of every third-party construction file.
- Falls from elevation (roof, scaffold, ladder, unguarded opening), struck-by injuries from falling material or moving equipment, caught-in or caught-between injuries (trench collapse, machinery), and electrical contact. OSHA's 'Fatal Four' categories track those patterns. Each has its own standards (Subparts M for falls, Subpart P for trenching, etc.) and its own evidence playbook, but the underlying analysis is always the same: who controlled the work, who knew about the hazard, and what duty did they owe.
- Two years from the date of the injury under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003 for negligence claims. Comp claims have their own much shorter notice and filing deadlines under the Texas Labor Code, typically 30 days to notify the employer and one year to file a claim with the Division of Workers' Compensation. The Comp process and the third-party lawsuit run in parallel and have different procedural calendars.
Let's talk about your case.
Free case review, no obligation. We'll tell you straight whether we can help.