A fire broke out during Margaret Moore’s home renovation after a painting subcontractor had worked on the stairs; investigators suspected oily rags or a soiled drop cloth had spontaneously combusted. Moore sued general contractor Tommy York, alleging the subcontractor was negligent. On York’s interlocutory appeal from denial of summary judgment, the Court of Appeals assumed for review that York hired the painter, despite conflicting evidence. Georgia generally does not hold a contractor liable for an independent contractor’s torts. Under OCGA § 51-2-5 (3), Moore needed evidence of an express agreement requiring York to answer for the subcontractor’s conduct. The record had no written contract or evidence of such an oral term; allegations that York agreed to perform renovations in a workmanlike manner did not establish it. Once York showed that gap, Moore produced no rebuttal evidence, so York was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court reversed the denial of summary judgment. Because the trial court relied only on subsection (3), it did not decide the separate control-based exception or resolve a claimed conflict in precedent.