By Michele Evans / NYweeklyRecord.com / Date: 8/31/2026
Category: Accountability / Public Space / NYPD
NEW YORK CITY, NY –
A class-action lawsuit accuses Guastavino’s, the luxury event venue beneath the Queensboro Bridge, of turning a city-owned public plaza into a private amenity for high-priced weddings and galas.
The case, filed in Manhattan Supreme Court, alleges that the venue and related defendants repeatedly blocked New Yorkers from a small plaza at East 59th Street and First Avenue. The plaintiffs say the space belongs to the public, even as signs, ropes, trellises and security guards made it look and feel private.
The lawsuit claims Guastavino’s marketed the outdoor space while charging as much as $300,000 for some events. Those figures describe event prices reported from the court filing. They are not a judicial finding that the venue illegally collected that money.
One plaintiff, Sean Basinski, says he was repeatedly ordered out while trying to exercise or sit in the plaza. The complaint alleges that venue workers removed his belongings during one confrontation and that police later arrested him for trespassing. The trespass case was dismissed, according to published reports.
The complaint also alleges that officers from the NYPD’s 19th Precinct treated the plaza as private property and helped remove Basinski. The NYPD declined to comment on the pending litigation. The allegations against the department and the venue remain unproven.
Other named plaintiffs say the barriers and confrontations discouraged ordinary use of one of the neighborhood’s few quiet outdoor spaces. Their claim is bigger than access to a single patch of Manhattan. It asks whether a private operator can profit from public land while city agencies fail to make the public’s rights clear.
Guastavino’s acknowledges that the area is a public plaza. A spokesperson said signs describing it as private property were removed and that the venue is working with the city on a plan that keeps the space public while allowing safe emergency exits during events.
That response addresses the signs but leaves central questions unanswered. It does not explain who authorized past closures, what instructions police received, how often the plaza was restricted or whether the city collected or lost money while the venue used the space.
The plaintiffs want a judge to formally confirm the plaza’s public status, stop future exclusion and require the return of profits they allege were earned from its use. The court has not ruled on those requests or decided liability.
Public space is only public when residents can use it without guessing whether a private guard or a police officer will order them out. This case now puts the venue’s conduct, the city’s oversight and the NYPD’s alleged role before a judge.
Leave a Reply