No. 25-1428October Term 2025Before Arguments
Bradley J. Chilelli, Petitioner v. Signify North America Corporation
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Case status
- Current stage
- Before Arguments
- Latest event
- Accepted by the Court
- Decision timing
- No window until argument is scheduled.
- What it's about
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Question presented
1. Whether a premises owner that retains authority over contractor safety, maintains site safety policies, and exercises control over contractor operations may avoid any duty of care to an injured contractor’s employee where a catastrophic hazard existed on the owner’s premises during demolition work. 2. Whether the lower courts’ application of the independent-contractor exception to premises liability improperly forecloses recovery for severe injuries arising from hazards on an owner-controlled industrial site, in tension with the approach taken by other jurisdictions applying Restatement (Second) of Torts § 414 and related doctrines. 3. Whether, under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324A, a premises owner’s voluntary undertaking of contractor safety obligations gives rise to a tort duty without a separate showing of reliance by the contractor or its employees.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit / Accepted by the Court
- Area
Supreme Court case awaiting argument
Timing
Expected by late June 2026, if argued this term
The Court granted review but has not yet scheduled oral argument. Once argued, the median case reaches a decision in 94 days. Nearly all cases are decided by the end of the term in which they are argued.
Briefing
What it's about
An injured contractor's employee is asking the Supreme Court to review when a property owner can be legally responsible for dangerous conditions during demolition work. The petition says an owner that kept authority over site safety and contractor operations should not avoid responsibility just because the worker was employed by an outside contractor.
Argument
The case has not been scheduled for argument. The petition says the owner kept control over safety and operations, while the lower courts applied rules that can limit owner responsibility when outside contractors are involved.
Impact
The case could affect who pays when workers are severely hurt on owner-controlled industrial sites. For example, it could matter when a contract worker is injured by a major hazard at a demolition site.
What is at stake in Chilelli v. Signify North America?
The petition asks whether a property owner can be legally responsible after keeping control over safety and operations during demolition work. It also asks whether voluntary safety efforts by an owner can create responsibility to injured contract workers.
Who could be affected if the Court takes this case?
Industrial site owners, contractors, and contract workers could all be affected. The case could shape who may be sued after serious jobsite injuries.
What happens next in Bradley J. Chilelli v. Signify North America Corporation?
The petition is pending before the Supreme Court and has not been scheduled for argument. Watch for a scheduling move or news on whether the justices will hear it.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 17, 2026
- Method
- Methodology