Port Authority Cancels Geico Contract for GWB

I posted just two days ago about the dangerous agreement that the Port Authority made with Geico to put billboards and other ads on the George Washington Bridge. Dangerous because the main focus of the $3.2M agreement was to divert the attention of drivers in a toll plaza away from the cars around them and toward the ads. Where they saw money, I saw danger and liability.

And just as suddenly as it was announced, the deal is now cancelled, as per this article in today’s New York Times. As much as I would love to claim credit that my injury warnings from this tiny corner of cyberspace had something to do with it the article doesn’t cite safety as any of the reasons.

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts:

  1. Geico and New York’s Port Authority: Making Life More Dangerous
  2. Port Authority Liability Upheld in 1993 World Trade Center Bombing
  3. New York City Transit Authority Found Liable in Fall Down Non-Owned Stairs
  4. Did New York Courts Exceed their Authority With New Advertisng Rules?
  5. NYC Transit Authority Gets Bench Slapped By Brooklyn Judge

Tags:

January 9, 2007 · No Comments ·

No Responses Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.