Texas House Bill HB 2203

Texas 2025 - 89th Regular

• Filed: 1/29/25
• Out of House Committee: 5/8/25

Caption

Relating to liability for land surveying services in or in connection with certain construction or services contracts.

Summary

HB 2203 expands Texas construction-contract liability and indemnity rules to expressly include land surveyors alongside architects and engineers. The bill amends Chapter 130 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code and related Local Government Code provisions so that land surveying services are treated the same as architectural and engineering services for purposes of indemnity limits, defense obligations, insurance requirements, and standards of care in contracts tied to real property improvements. Under the bill, certain contract clauses requiring a contractor or land surveyor to indemnify, hold harmless, or defend another party for that party’s own negligence are void and unenforceable, with limited exceptions. It also requires land surveying services to be performed with the ordinary professional skill and care expected of competent surveyors, and it voids any contract term that tries to impose a different standard of care. Similar protections and requirements are added for contracts involving governmental agencies, including limits on indemnity and defense provisions and permission for additional-insured insurance requirements. The bill’s legal impact is to broaden existing statutory protections for design professionals to cover land surveyors in both private and public construction-related contracts. It affects owners, contractors, surveyors, architects, engineers, and governmental entities by restricting how liability can be shifted in contracts and by clarifying that surveyors cannot be forced to accept standards of care or defense obligations beyond those set by statute. The changes apply only to contracts entered into on or after September 1, 2025. The overall sentiment appears neutral to mildly supportive of clarifying and standardizing liability rules for land surveying services, though there is no recorded committee testimony or vote detail in the provided materials. The bill was ultimately laid on the table subject to call in the House, which suggests it did not advance at that stage despite being considered in the Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence process. Notable points of contention, based on the bill text itself, would likely center on the balance between protecting surveyors from broad indemnity and defense demands and preserving owners’ and governmental agencies’ ability to manage project risk through contract terms and insurance. The bill preserves some owner and agency protections, such as additional-insured requirements and reimbursement of attorney’s fees in proportion to liability, but it limits broader indemnity and defense clauses that would shift responsibility for another party’s negligence.

Impact

HB 2203 amends Chapter 130 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code and Section 271.904 of the Local Government Code to add land surveyors to the statutory framework governing indemnity, defense, insurance, and standard-of-care provisions in construction and real-property service contracts. It makes certain indemnity and defense clauses void and unenforceable when they improperly shift liability for another party’s negligence, and it requires land surveying services to meet the ordinary professional standard of care. The bill also applies these rules to governmental contracts and specifies that the changes apply prospectively only to contracts entered into on or after the effective date.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript, witness testimony, or vote breakdown, so there is no documented debate to gauge detailed support or opposition. The bill’s subject matter suggests a technical, industry-specific measure aimed at aligning land surveyors with existing protections for architects and engineers. Its disposition—laid on the table subject to call—indicates it did not move forward at that time, but the provided materials do not show whether that was due to substantive disagreement, scheduling, or other procedural reasons.

Contention

The main policy tension is between limiting contractual liability-shifting for land surveyors and preserving flexibility for owners, contractors, and governmental agencies to allocate risk. Opponents of broader indemnity limits might argue that project owners need strong contractual remedies and defense rights, especially on public projects, while supporters would emphasize that surveyors should not be forced to indemnify or defend others for negligence they did not cause. Another likely point of contention is the bill’s prohibition on contract terms setting a different standard of care, which restricts private negotiation but creates uniformity across the industry.