O.C.G.A. § 43-21-1 (2019)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS No duty to monitor medical conditions of guests. - O.C.G.A. § 43-21-1 et seq., does not impose upon innkeepers the duty to rescue and does not expand an innkeeper’s duty of care for the personal safety of the innkeeper’s guests beyond that required in the state’s caselaw; to require that an innkeeper monitor in any manner the possible health problems of a guest, which are not caused by or are unrelated to the stay at the facility, is not only unwarranted as a matter of law but unworkable as a matter of fact and practicality. Rasnick v. Krishna Hospitality, Inc., 289 Ga. 565, 713 S.E.2d 835, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 543 (2011). Liability for baggage commences at time of delivery to hotel porter at depot. - Traveler who is met at a depot by the porter of a hotel, who indicates a conveyance by which the traveler may go to the hotel, becomes the guest of the hotel so far as to render the proprietor liable for safe-keeping of the traveler’s baggage or baggage check delivered to the porter; such liability commences from time of delivery to porter. Coskery v. Nagle, 83 Ga. 696, 10 S.E. 491, 1889 Ga. LEXIS 138 (1889). Issue of guest status and liability for jewelry. - There was an issue of fact as to whether the guest was still a “guest” at the time the guest’s jewelry was entrusted to the hotel and, therefore, whether the innkeeper statutes applied, but if the guest was still a guest at the time the guest asked the hotel to keep the jewelry, the claim under the innkeeper statutes was limited to $1,000. Jordan v.

Marriott International, Inc., 346 Ga. App. 706, 816 S.E.2d 822, 2018 Ga. App. LEXIS 451 (2018). No expectation of privacy after check out time. - Because the motel room registration of the woman the defendant was staying with had run out at 11:00 A.M., neither the defendant nor the woman was a guest after that time due to their failure to pay for another night’s stay and, thus, the defendant had no legal possession or control of the room and no expectation of privacy where the drugs were found since the officers entered and searched the motel room after 11:00 A.M. Lindsey v. State, 353 Ga. App. 231, 836 S.E.2d 563, 2019 Ga. App. LEXIS 623 (2019). Persons not paying fee for room are not guests. - Trial court erred by assuming that the defendants had a continuing expectation of privacy in a hotel room because a guest services agent had the authority to evict the defendants from the room once the agent learned that the defendants had checked into the hotel using a fraudulent credit card, and because the defendants had obtained the room through a fraudulent credit card that would not be honored by the credit card company, the defendants were not paying a fee for the room and were not guests within the meaning of O.C.G.A. § 43-21-1(1); therefore, the defendants could be evicted from the room for cause, and if the defendants were being evicted from the hotel for cause, under O.C.G.A. § 43-21-3.1(b), the defendants were not entitled to notice of the eviction. State v.

HOTEL, INN, & ROADHOUSE OPERATORS

Delvechio, 301 Ga. App. 560, 687 S.E.2d 845, 2009 Ga. App. LEXIS 1274 (2009). No duty to comply with requests to attempt rescue of guest from medical peril. - Court of appeals did not err in affirming an order granting a motel summary judgment in a wife’s a wrongful death action, alleging that the failure of the motel’s personnel to heed her concern about the guest amounted to a breach of duty to render aid to a guest because the motel had no duty to comply with the wife’s requests to attempt a rescue of the

guest from his medical peril; the alleged negligence in the wife’s suit could not be credibly cast as a condition of the premises or akin to a premises hazard like a smoke-filled building because any risk or problem stemming from a medical condition unrelated to and not caused by the guest’s stay at the facility was not internal to the premises but rather internal to the guest. Rasnick v. Krishna Hospitality, Inc., 289 Ga. 565, 713 S.E.2d 835, 2011 Ga. LEXIS 543 (2011).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 40A Am. Jur. 2d, Hotels, Motels and Restaurants, § 25 et seq. C.J.S. 43A C.J.S., Inns, Hotels and Eating Places, § 266 et seq. ALR. Relation of innkeeper and guest as affected by payment for accommodation by week, month, or the like, 12 A.L.R. 261; 145 A.L.R. 363.

Improper motive or purpose in going to hotel as affecting one’s status as guest, or invitee of a guest, for purpose of determining degree of care owed by proprietor, 16 A.L.R. 1388. Liability of innkeeper for indignity to one occupying room without being registered, 29 A.L.R. 481. What constitutes a hotel or inn, 53 A.L.R. 988.