Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 509.111 (2025)

Liability for property of guests.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

509.111 Liability for property of guests.—

(1) The operator of a public lodging establishment is not under any obligation to accept for safekeeping any moneys, securities, jewelry, or precious stones of any kind belonging to any guest, and, if such are accepted for safekeeping, the operator is not liable for the loss thereof unless such loss was the proximate result of fault or negligence of the operator. However, the liability of the operator shall be limited to $1,000 for such loss, if the public lodging establishment gave a receipt for the property (stating the value) on a form which stated, in type large enough to be clearly noticeable, that the public lodging establishment was not liable for any loss exceeding $1,000 and was only liable for that amount if the loss was the proximate result of fault or negligence of the operator.

(2) The operator of a public lodging establishment is not liable or responsible to any guest for the loss of wearing apparel, goods, or other property, except as provided in subsection (1), unless such loss occurred as the proximate result of fault or negligence of such operator, and, in case of fault or negligence, the operator is not liable for a greater sum than $500, unless the guest, prior to the loss or damage, files with the operator an inventory of the guest’s effects and the value thereof and the operator is given the opportunity to inspect such effects and check them against such inventory. The operator of a public lodging establishment is not liable or responsible to any guest for the loss of effects listed in such inventory in a total amount exceeding $1,000.

History.—s. 4, ch. 1999, 1874; RS 873; GS 1231; RGS 2355; s. 11, ch. 9264, 1923; s. 1, ch. 12052, 1927; CGL 3759; s. 40, ch. 16042, 1933; CGL 1936 Supp. 3759; s. 1, ch. 23931, 1947; s. 2, ch. 28129, 1953; s. 6, ch. 73-325; s. 1, ch. 73-364; s. 3, ch. 76-168; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 1, ch. 77-457; ss. 8, 39, 42, ch. 79-240; ss. 3, 4, ch. 81-161; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; ss. 11, 51, 52, ch. 90-339; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 671, ch. 97-103.

Note.—Former s. 510.04.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 17 cases, 1957–1996 · leading case: Fennema v. Howard Johnson Co., 559 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Fennema v. Howard Johnson Co., 559 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). · cites it 19× “" § 509.111, Fla. Stat. (1985). Under the above statute: "a hotel's liability for a guest's loss of property is limited to 0 unless the hotel accepts property for safekeeping pursuant to subsection (1) or the guest, in accordance with subsection (2) provides an inventory of…”

Sarah Zacharia v. Harbor Island Spa, Inc., 684 F.2d 199 (2d Cir. 1982). · cites it 3× “I, (WE) am (are) aware that said hotel- is not obliged to receive such contents and this statement is made as an inducement to said hotel to receive contents pursuant to Section 509.111, Florida Statutes. I, (WE) do hereby waive any claim against said hotel, its agents, servants…”

Florida Sonesta Corp. v. Aniballi, 463 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). · cites it 16× “101(1), Florida Statutes (1979), and, as a consequence, waived the

Great Am. Ins. Co. v. Coppedge, 405 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). · cites it 10× “§ 509.111, Fla. Stat. (1979). Accordingly, the trial court correctly determined that a jury question was presented on that issue.”

Garner v. Margery Lane, Inc., 242 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). · cites it 9× “Defendant may not avoid liability under Section 509.111, Florida Statutes, since it instituted a procedure for depositing valuables which did not require strict compliance with the statute.”

Elson v. State, 337 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 1976). · cites it 2× “Fla. Stat. § 509.111 , F.S.A. It is only natural that the circumstances of this arrest created general suspicion on the part of the investigating officer.”

David v. Prime Hosp. Corp., 676 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). · cites it 4× “Respondent moved for, and the lower court entered, summary judgment limiting respondent's liability in accord with section 509.111, Florida Statutes *1050 (1993).”

Lazare Kaplan & Sons, Inc. v. Pensacola Hotel Co., 153 F. Supp. 31 (N.D. Fla. 1957). · cites it 3× “The three counts are based on (1) common-law bailment, (2) negligence, and (3) allegation of a waiver by the hotel company of the protection provided it by the Florida Statute (F.S.A. § 509.111) and thus rendering itself liable under the common-law bailment and negligence…”

Millman v. Howard Johnson's Co., 533 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). · cites it 3× “After the trial, the lower court reduced the verdict and judgment to 0 pursuant to section 509.111(1), Florida Statutes (1983), 2 on the ground that the statutory prerequisites for the recovery of more than

Lazare Kaplan & Sons, Inc. v. Pensacola Hotel Co., S. Lesse & Sons, Inc. v. Pensacola Hotel Co., 253 F.2d 410 (5th Cir. 1958). “These two appeals consolidated for submission here are from orders granting defendant’s motions to dismiss the action in each case because, under the Florida Statutes governing the liability of innkeepers, F.S.A. § 509.111, the complaint failed to state a claim against it.”

Saf. Harbor Spa, Inc. v. High, 137 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962). “The appellant argues that Florida Statutes, § 509.111, F.S.A., which deals with the liability of innkeepers for property of their guests, requires a special deposit with the defendant; a receipt in writing to the plaintiff in exchange therefor; and a statement of the value of…”

Howard Johnson Co. v. Fair, 575 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). · cites it 8× “Thus, it is generally held that statutes, such as section 509.111, defining the limits of an innkeeper’s liability for loss of or injury to his guest’s property, should be strictly construed.”

Show all 17 citing cases →

— 509.111(1) — 5 cases

Sarah Zacharia v. Harbor Island Spa, Inc., 684 F.2d 199 (2d Cir. 1982). “I, (WE) am (are) aware that said hotel- is not obliged to receive such contents and this statement is made as an inducement to said hotel to receive contents pursuant to Section 509.111, Florida Statutes. I, (WE) do hereby waive any claim against said hotel, its agents, servants…”

Florida Sonesta Corp. v. Aniballi, 463 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). “101(1), Florida Statutes (1979), and, as a consequence, waived the

Garner v. Margery Lane, Inc., 242 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). “Defendant may not avoid liability under Section 509.111, Florida Statutes, since it instituted a procedure for depositing valuables which did not require strict compliance with the statute.”

Millman v. Howard Johnson's Co., 533 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). “After the trial, the lower court reduced the verdict and judgment to 0 pursuant to section 509.111(1), Florida Statutes (1983), 2 on the ground that the statutory prerequisites for the recovery of more than

Aniballi v. Florida Sonesta Corp., 6 Fla. Supp. 2d 224 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1984).

— 509.111(2) — 4 cases

Cole v. Carmell, 112 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959).

Howard Johnson Co. v. Fair, 575 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). “Thus, it is generally held that statutes, such as section 509.111, defining the limits of an innkeeper’s liability for loss of or injury to his guest’s property, should be strictly construed.”

Southernmost Affiliates v. Alonzo, 654 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).

Kaufman v. Columbus Hotel, 12 Fla. Supp. 71 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Miami-Dade Cty. 1957).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.