Venduro v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The court found issues of fact as to whether Adirondack was responsible for maintenance of the platform under its agreement with defendant Port Authority, and whether Adirondack met its duty to deposit the passengers in a safe area. Contrary to the court’s characterization, the agreement between these parties was a “licensing agreement,” not a “lease.” Adirondack’s status as a licensee, without more, did not give rise to a duty to maintain the gate areas (see Gibbs v Port Auth. of N.Y., 17 AD3d 252, 255 [2005]). The Port Authority retained primary responsibility for repair and maintenance of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Blye v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Blye v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Gibbs v. Port AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Trainer v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Abraham v. Port AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006