Do engineers owe fiduciary duties to the general public based on rules issued by their governing board? The Houston Court of Appeals recently examined this issue and held that, absent a relationship of trust and confidence, the board rules do not create such a duty.

At issue in Hussion Street Buildings, LLC v. TRW Engineers, Inc., was a housing development constructed adjacent to property owned by Hussion. TRW was a civil engineer involved in the development. Hussion alleged that TRW’s scope of work included design of a water-detention plan, but that TRW failed to design or specify one. Hussion claimed that TRW’s failure to provide a water-detention plan for the development resulted in flooding into a warehouse located on Hussion’s property.

Despite Hussion never having any contractual or other professional relationship with Hussion, Hussion sued TRW for breach of fiduciary duty.  The trial court granted summary judgment for TRW on the basis that engineers do owe fiduciary duties to non-clients under Texas law, and Hussion appealed.  On appeal, Hussion argued that the regulations for engineers created by the Board of Professional Engineers and set forth in the Texas Administrative Code (Board Rules) created an informal fiduciary relationship between TRW (and all engineers) and the general public. Specifically, Hussion argued that TRW breached three fiduciary duties: (1) duty to protect the public, (2) duty to be objective and truthful, and (3) duty of competence.

On appeal, Hussion argued that these three provisions of the Board Rules imposed fiduciary duties upon TRW (and all engineers) to the general public. Specifically, Hussion contended that under the Rules, TRW owed fiduciary duties to protect the public (Tex. Admin. Code §137.55), to be objective and truthful (Tex. Admin. Code§137.57), and the duty of competence (Tex. Admin. Code §137.59).  The Houston Court of Appeals, 14^thDistrict, disagreed,

After noting that the Board Rules do not create any fiduciary duties owed by engineers to the general public, the Court homed in on the nonexistence of any sort of relationship of trust between TRW and Hussion. Because Hussion and TRW did not have an independent relationship of trust and confidence with TRW, the court held that TRW did not owe any fiduciary duties to Hussion. Therefore, the court determined that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment for TRW.

The attorneys in our Austin and Dallas offices assist members of the design and construction industry interpret rules governing the practice of engineering, architecture and land surveying in the State of Texas.  If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at info@gstexlaw.com.

Legal Disclaimers

This blog is made available by Gerstle Snelson, LLP for educational purposes and to provide general information about the law, only.  Neither this document nor the information contained in it is intended to constitute legal advice on any specific matter or of a general nature.  Use of the blog does not create an attorney-client relationship with Gerstle Snelson, LLP where one does not already exist with the firm.  This blog should not be used a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney.

©Gerstle Snelson, LLP 2022.  All rights reserved.  Any unauthorized reprint or use of this material is prohibited.  No part of this blog may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system without the express written permission of Gerstle Snelson, LLP.