Inkeepers Rights To Evict A Guest Outline 1. Intro a. Definition b. Innkeepers rights 2. Reasons to Evict a.
Nonpayment of a bill b. Overstaying c. Disorderly conduct d. Serious or contagious illness e. Objectionable character or improper conduct f. Business competitors seeking to solicit customers g.
Non-guests 3. How to Evict a. Legal forms b. Innkeepers lien c. Excessive force d. Liability for wrongful eviction 4.
Tenant vs. Guest a. Guidelines of differences b. Actions to be taken under circumstances 5. Conclusion Under certain circumstances an innkeeper has the right to withdraw hotel privileges and evict a guest. Evict means to remove someone from property. A hotel can evict a guest for nonpayment of a bill, overstaying, disorderly conduct, serious or contagious illness, or objectionable character.
In addition to those conditions a hotel may also evict business competitors seeking to solicit customers under certain circumstances along with non-guests (Cournoyer, p. 356). The hotelkeeper must first make certain the person occupying the room is a guest and not a tenant. If the person is a tenant, than the above reasons for evicting them must be accompanied with a court proceeding. The right to evict stems from the duty of the innkeeper to receive and provide adequate accommodations, without discrimination, to all who come in a fit condition to be received, who are willing and able to pay as long as the hotel has a room.
If, after the guests admission, circumstances occur which would have justified the innkeeper in refusing to admit that person, the innkeeper has justification for evicting that guest (Kalt, p. 53). Once admitted, a guest is in a better position to demand the services of the innkeeper than when that person first applied for admission, but that alone does not secure the guest from being evicted (Sherry, p. 109). Failure to pay a hotel bill is grounds for eviction. Ordinarily, the hotel makes a demand upon the guest for the amount of the bill and requests the guest to leave by a certain hour if the bill is not paid.
The hotel has the right to evict immediately as long as the person is a guest, and not a tenant. From the earliest times, the rule was that an innkeeper had the right to request payment before furnishing accommodations. By the nineteenth century, it had become customary not to require payment in advance, though the right to do so still remains (Sherry, p.114). A classic case on ejection for refusal to pay is Morningstar v Lafayettte Hotel Co. In this case the guest refused to pay his bill for both room service, and dining in the caf.
Then when he retuned for breakfast he was refused service. It was proven that the hotel is not required to entertain a guest who has refused to pay a lawful charge. If a guest overstays the agreed time limit that person may be required to leave. If the guest refuses, he may be evicted in a reasonable manner, not inflicting injury or undue humiliation upon the guest. A good practice that most hotelkeepers do is to print or stamp the date of departure on the registration card and on a copy given to the guest.
If the hotel has made other commitments for this room, the innkeeper should just remove the guests luggage from his room during his absence and to double-lock the door so the guest cant get back in to their room (Sherry, p. 115). Three states Hawaii, Louisiana, and North Carolina have passed statues that codify the common law position and make a holdover guest a trespasser. For example, Hawaiis statute specifies: Any guest who continues to occupy an assigned bedroom beyond the scheduled departure without the prior written approval of the keeper shall be deemed a trespasser. In the forty-seven states that dont have statutes specifically covering the rights of innkeepers with regard to overstays, to reduce the possibility of any lawsuits, innkeepers should proceed with caution when evicting a guest (Cournyer, p. 357).
Another right of an innkeeper is to eject guests, and non-guest who engage in disorderly, undesirable, or unacceptable conduct at the inn. Most states have statutes similar to the following: Eviction of disorderly persons: Every owner or keeper of any hotel, inn, motel, boarding house or lodging house in this state shall have the right to evict from such premises anyone who acts in a disorderly manner, or who destroys the property of any such owner or keeper, or causes a public disturbance in or upon such premises. In absence of this statute, common-law right to so evict remains. In exercising ones rights under these laws, common or statutory, discretion and care would always be in order (Goodwin, p. 402).
In the case of Le Mistral v. Columbia Broadcasting System, the television crew sent a camera crew to a restaurant that had been cited for health code violations. In an effort to catch unsanitary practices on camera, they went in with the cameras rolling. With the lights blaring, disturbing other diners, the restaurant ordered the crew to leave and sued for damages on the grounds of trespassing (Cournyer, p.360). According to common-law, hotel operators have the right to evict a guest who contracts a contagious disease that is easily spread. The innkeeper is obligated to use extreme care to avoid aggravating the guests condition by using the assistance of a public health official, a doctor, or an ambulance. The innkeeper can exclude the guest with an easily spread disease because accommodating them would expose many others to the illness, violating the innkeepers duty of reasonable care for guests well being (Cournyer, p. 360).
The improper conduct or objectionable character should not be tolerated in hotels. In Raider v. Dixie Inn the court, upholding the right to eject a common prostitute enumerated the types of undesirable conduct which have been held to justify exclusion from an inn: It appears, therefore, fully settled that an innkeeper may lawfully refuse to entertain objectionable characters, if to do so is calculated to injure his business or to place himself, business, or guests in a hazardous, uncomfortable, or dangerous situation It should be noted that the cases on ejection and refusal to receive for undesirable character are quite old. The question is simply not litigated today (Sherry, p. 112). A guest, who is engaged in a lawful occupation as a salesmen and who attempts to sell his wares to other guests, may be ejected from the hotel.
Despite the legality of his occupation, if the management objects to his pursuing his trade among the guests, he may be stopped and ejected, even though his action may not be annoying to the guests. While …