Airport Parking Company of America, Case Study Example

Facts In The Case

In 1966, Lenore Ellish parked her automobile at an airport lot operated by the Airport Parking Company of America, Inc. Five days later, Ellish returned to the lot to retrieve her automobile but found that it had disappeared. As a result, Ellish filed a lawsuit against the Airport Parking Company with the aim being to retrieve her property or its financial value. At the trial, the Civil Court of the City of New York ruled that because bailment had not been created, the defendant was not liable for the loss of Ellish’s automobile. The court also determined that “in the absence of any proof of negligence on the part of the defendant,” the Airport Parking Company could not be held liable for the loss of Ellish’s automobile (“Lenore Ellish, Appellant, v. Airport Parking Company of America, Inc., Respondent” 1).

Overriding Issue

The main issue in this case is bailment or the temporary placing of a piece of property (i.e., Ellish’s automobile) under the control of another person or entity (i.e., the Airport Parking Company) for a specified purpose (i.e., Ellish’s automobile in the parking lot at the airport) and which has been agreed upon by both parties. Basically then, after Ellish parked her car at the  fenced-in parking lot at the airport, “accepted a stamped ticket labeled “License to Park” from a vending machine, selected a place to park, locked the car and took the keys with her” (“Lenore Ellish, Appellant, v. Airport Parking Company of America, Inc., Respondent” 2), the Airport Parking Company was found not to be negligent for the disappearance of the automobile, due to the lack of proof that the parking company was responsible for the automobile’s disappearance.

The Court’s Decision

First of all, the lower court (Civil Court of the City of New York) found in favor of the defendant, due to the absence of bailment. Then Ellish appealed that decision with the Supreme Court for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts of New York which agreed with the lower court because “no bailment existed between the plaintiff and the defendant” (“Lenore Ellish, Appellant, v. Airport Parking Company of America, Inc., Respondent” 1).

Reasoning

It is interesting to note that Ellish was told that the airport parking lot was not attended, meaning that there was no security personnel present, and that she parked her car in the lot at her own risk. Thus, as noted by Judge Hopkins, “any expectation that the defendant would take special precautions to protect her car while she was away could not reasonably have been in her mind” (“Lenore Ellish, Appellant, v. Airport Parking Company of America, Inc., Respondent” 4) which refers to the suggestion that Ellish assumed that her automobile would be safe and secure at the airport parking lot. There are a number of precedents related to this case, such as Wall v. Airport Parking Lot of Chicago. However, Judge Shapiro dissented via stating that the defendant should have been held responsible for the disappearance of Ellish’s automobile (presumably purloined by unknown parties).

Observation

Overall, it would have been a wise move on the part of Ellish to have obtained bailment, being some type of binding agreement with the Airport Parking Company that if her automobile ends up missing, the airport parking company would be liable for either replacing it with another vehicle of equal value or financial compensation.

Works Cited

Lenore Ellish, Appellant, v. Airport Parking Company of America, Inc., Respondent. [no number in original]. Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department, 42 A.D.2d 174; 345 N.Y.S.2d 650; 1973 N.Y. App. Div., LEXIS 3788, July 9, 1973.