When a worker is injured on a New York construction site, one of the first things the responsible parties do is point to the contract. Owners and general contractors routinely include indemnification clauses designed to shift liability onto subcontractors, even for accidents the owner or general contractor caused. These clauses are written to create the impression that someone else is always on the hook. New York General Obligations Law (GOB) § 5-322.1(1) limits that practice directly. It makes unenforceable any provision in a construction contract that attempts to shift liability for a party's own negligence onto someone else. For an injured worker, this law matters because it affects which parties can be held accountable for what happened on that job site.
In This Article
Who Does GOB § 5-322.1(1) Protect?
GOB § 5-322.1(1) protects anyone injured in connection with construction, renovation, repair, or maintenance work on a building or structure in New York. It applies whether you were hurt on a large commercial project, a residential renovation, or routine maintenance. The law covers the entire chain of parties involved: property owners, general contractors, and subcontractors. If any of those parties contributed to the conditions that caused your injury, this statute limits their ability to use contract language to walk away from that responsibility.
How Defendants Use Contract Language to Escape Responsibility
After a construction accident, it is common for owners and general contractors to point to the contract as a shield. These agreements routinely contain clauses requiring subcontractors to cover liability for accidents on the project, including accidents caused by the owner's or general contractor's own negligence. The strategy is to make it appear that the party you are suing has already transferred all responsibility to someone else through paperwork.
GOB § 5-322.1(1) is the direct legal response to that tactic. No matter how broadly a clause is written, a party in New York cannot contr shift liability for its own negligence onto someone else. Courts look at what the clause does, not just what it says. If the effect is to relieve the general contractor or owner of responsibility for harm they caused or contributed to, that portion of the clause is unenforceable. The party whose negligence injured you remains legally accountable, regardless of what the contract says.
Defendants in construction injury cases routinely invoke these clauses to redirect blame and complicate your recovery. The breadth of the contract language does not determine who is liable. The facts of who created the dangerous condition do.
Multiple Parties Can Still Be Held Accountable Under GOB § 5-322.1(1)
One of the most important things to understand after a construction site injury is that a contract between the owner and a subcontractor does not eliminate defendants from your case. When the general contractor controlled the site, set the safety protocols, directed the work method, or ignored a known hazard, no clause relieves the contractor of accountability. When multiple parties each contributed to the dangerous condition, each of them can be held responsible for their share. The contract may determine how liability is distributed among defendants, but does not remove them from the case.
Construction contracts also frequently require subcontractors to carry insurance naming the owner and general contractor as covered parties. That insurance obligation exists separately from the indemnification clause and can remain in force even when the clause itself is limited by the statute. In a serious construction injury case, both the contract language and the available insurance coverage need to be fully investigated to identify every source of recovery.
How New York Courts Have Applied GOB § 5-322.1(1)
Itri Brick & Concrete v. Aetna Cas. & Surety
In this case, the Court of Appeals held that a broadly written indemnification clause is not enforced in full simply because it was drafted that way. Courts strip out whatever portion violates the statute and enforce only what the law permits. Defense counsel cannot rely on broad contract language to shield a negligent party from its responsibility to an injured worker.
Brown v. Two Exchange Plaza Partners
The Court of Appeals established that a clause does not have to explicitly name a party's own negligence to be challenged. If the clause is broad enough to cover it in effect, the statute applies. Language like "any and all claims" is treated as reaching the negligent party's own fault, and to that extent it is unenforceable. Defendants cannot write around this law by using neutral-sounding language.
When both the general contractor and subcontractor contributed to an injury, the Court of Appeals held that the indemnification clause cannot require the subcontractor to cover the full judgment. Each party is responsible for its own share. Even a small degree of fault on the general contractor's side prevents it from using the contract to eliminate its liability to the injured worker entirely.
Contact Sternberg Injury Law Firm
If you were injured on a New York construction site, the contracts between the owner, general contractor, and subcontractors are not just paperwork. They may determine who the defendants are, may determine which parties remain in the case, and who ultimately who has to pay for your injuries. Understanding how GOB § 5-322.1(1) applies to those contracts is a critical part of building a complete case on your behalf.
The personal injury attorneys at Sternberg Injury Law Firm have represented injured workers in construction accident cases. We examine the contracts, identify every party that bears responsibility for the conditions that harmed you, and pursue the full recovery you are entitled to under the law. We offer free consultations and can meet at your home, a hospital, or another location that works for you. Our team assists clients in multiple languages, including Creole, English, Hebrew, Hindi, Russian, Spanish, Urdu, Uzbek, and Yiddish.
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. New York law prohibits construction contracts from shielding a party from liability for its own negligence. If the owner or general contractor caused or contributed to the conditions that injured you, that party remains accountable regardless of what the contract says. The paperwork cannot override the law.
Not if the owner also bears responsibility. Pointing to a subcontractor does not relieve the owner of accountability for its own role in the accident. If both parties contributed to the dangerous condition, both can be held liable. Each party is responsible for the harm it caused.
Yes. Construction accidents frequently involve multiple responsible parties: the property owner, the general contractor, and one or more subcontractors. An indemnification clause between those parties affects how liability is allocated among defendants, not whether you have a claim against each of them.
Your employer on the job site does not determine who can be held liable for your injuries. General contractors and property owners can be sued directly under New York's Labor Law even when you were employed by a subcontractor. GOB § 5-322.1(1) prevents those parties from using the contract to escape accountability for conditions they controlled or created.
Seek medical attention immediately and document the accident site and your injuries as thoroughly as possible. Speak with a personal injury attorney before giving any statement to an insurance company or employer. The contracts, the site conditions, and the parties involved all need to be evaluated early, as evidence can disappear quickly on an active job site.