New York Law Review

Bingham v. New York City Transit Authority, 8 N.Y.3d 176 (2007): Common Carrier Duty to Maintain Approaches to Stations

Published by

The New York Law Review

in

8 N.Y.3d 176 (2007)

A common carrier has a duty to maintain a safe means of ingress and egress for its passengers, even on property it does not own, occupy, or control, if that area is primarily used as a means of access to and from the carrier’s station.

Summary

Ina Jean Bingham sued the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) for injuries sustained when she fell on a stairway leading to a subway station. She alleged a protruding metal strip caused her fall. The key issue was whether the NYCTA had a duty to maintain the stairway, even though it didn’t own or control it. The Court of Appeals held that the NYCTA had a duty to maintain the stairway because it was primarily used for access to the subway. This reaffirmed the ‘Schlessinger rule,’ which holds common carriers responsible for safe ingress/egress. The court distinguished this duty from general premises liability, emphasizing passenger expectations.

Facts

In November 1995, Ina Jean Bingham fell on a stairway used to access a New York City subway station. She claimed her foot caught on a protruding metal strip. The stairway was not owned or maintained by the NYCTA. Bingham sued the NYCTA for failure to maintain the stairway in a safe condition and failure to warn of the dangerous condition.

Procedural History

The Supreme Court initially dismissed Bingham’s complaint, finding the NYCTA didn’t own the stairway. The Appellate Division affirmed. The Court of Appeals reversed and reinstated the complaint in a prior appeal (Bingham I), holding that NYCTA hadn’t proven it was merely a ‘common user’ of the stairway. After trial, the jury found in favor of Bingham. The Appellate Division modified, remanding for a new trial on damages only. The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal the liability finding.

Issue(s)

1. Whether the common carrier rule, as stated in Schlessinger v. Manhattan Ry. Co., should be abandoned in light of subsequent decisions limiting the special duties of common carriers.

2. Whether the NYCTA has a duty to maintain a stairway used to access its subway station, even if the NYCTA does not own, occupy, or control the stairway.

Holding

1. No, because the Schlessinger rule remains valid and consistent with passenger expectations.

2. Yes, because the stairway was primarily used as a means of access to and from the subway.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court reasoned that common carriers have a duty to provide safe ingress and egress for passengers. This duty extends to areas

More ARTICLES