419.010. Lodging establishment liable, when--defined.
Lodging establishment liable, when--defined.
419.010. 1. As used in this chapter, the term "lodgingestablishment" shall be any building, group of buildings, structure,facility, place, or places of business where five or more guest rooms areprovided, which is owned, maintained, or operated by any person and whichis kept, used, maintained, advertised or held out to the public for hirewhich can be construed to be a hotel, motel, motor hotel, apartment hotel,tourist court, resort, cabins, tourist home, bunkhouse, dormitory, or othersimilar place by whatever name called, and includes all such accommodationsoperated for hire as lodging establishments for either transient guests,permanent guests, or for both transient and permanent guests.
2. No lodging establishment in this state is liable for the loss ofany money, jewelry, wearing apparel, baggage or other property of a guestin a total sum greater than two hundred dollars, unless the lodgingestablishment by an agreement in writing individually, or by the authorizedagent or clerk in charge of the office of the lodging establishment,voluntarily assumes a greater liability with reference to such property.As regards money, jewelry or baggage, a lodging establishment is not liablein any event for the loss thereof or damage thereto, unless the same wasactually delivered by the guest to him or his authorized agent, or clerk,in the office of the lodging establishment, and the receipt thereofacknowledged by the delivery to the guest of a claim check of the lodgingestablishment, unless the loss or damage occurs through the willfulnegligence or wrongdoing of the lodging establishment, his servants oremployees. This section shall be posted in a conspicuous manner at theguest registration desk and in every guest room thereof, and unless soposted the same does not apply in the case of a lodging establishmentfailing to post same.
(RSMo 1939 § 9928, A.L. 1955 p. 852, A.L. 2002 S.B. 1243)Prior revision: 1929 § 13088
(1965) This section being in derogation of the common law is to be strictly construed, and a guest's automobile is not included in the words "or other property of a guest" in section limiting innkeeper's liability so that statute had no application. Phoenix Assur. Co. of New York v. Royale Investment Co. (A.), 393 S.W.2d 43.