Go Syfert

Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 4721.02 (2026)

Extent of liability - agreement

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Effective:

October 1, 1953

Latest Legislation:

House Bill 1 - 100th General Assembly

PDF:

Download Authenticated PDF

An innkeeper shall not be obliged to receive from a guest for deposit in the safe or vault, property described in section 4721.01 of the Revised Code exceeding a total value of five hundred dollars, and shall not be liable for such property exceeding such value whether received or not. Such innkeeper, by special arrangement with a guest may receive for deposit in such safe or vault property upon such written terms as may be agreed upon. An innkeeper shall be liable for a loss of any of such property of a guest in his inn caused by the theft or negligence of the innkeeper or his servant.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1958–2015 · leading case: World Diamond, Inc. v. Hyatt Corp., 699 N.E.2d 980 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

World Diamond, Inc. v. Hyatt Corp., 699 N.E.2d 980 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 20× “01 and that appellee did not enter into a special written arrangement pursuant to R.C. § 4721.02 since genuine issues of fact existed on this issue.”

Heimberger v. Zeal Hotel Grp., Ltd., 2015 Ohio 3845 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). “01 (finding innkeeper statutes to generally generally "reliev[e] innkeepers' liability based upon a status as an insurer of property [but] not bar recovery under R.C. 4721.02 where losses are occasioned by negligence of an innkeeper or by theft by employees of an innkeeper).”

H.K. Mallak, Inc. v. Fairfield FMC Corp., 33 F. Supp. 2d 748 (E.D. Wis. 1999). “In Ohio, for instance, where Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 4721.01 mirrors Wisconsin’s section 254.”

Chase Rand Corp. v. Pick Hotels Corp., 167 Ohio St. (N.S.) 299 (Ohio 1958). · cites it 14× “” Section 4721.02. “An innkeeper shall not be obliged to receive from a guest for deposit in the safe or vault, property described in Section 4721.”

Rappaport v. Akron West Hilton Inn, 622 N.E.2d 400 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Section 4721.02.” As we have found that the trial court erred in not finding whether the statutory requirements had been met, this assignment of error is rendered moot.”

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.