USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
One winter evening, you meet a friend for dinner at Moxy, a restaurant in a downtown hotel. You arrive at the Moxy, and before checking in with the host, you check your coat with the restaurant employee in the coat check room. The employee provides you with a small, pre-printed card containing the number 23. There is nothing else written on the card. You put it in your purse and head off to enjoy dinner with a friend. After dinner, you stop by the coat check room and provide the attendant with your pre-printed number 23 card. The attendant, who is not the same person on duty when you entered the restaurant and left your coat, searches the room. He is unable to find the coat. Despite a further and thorough search by a number of restaurant employees, the coat is missing.
The coat was designed wool coat that cost you $495.00. But, inside the coat pocket was an expensive watch, worth $2000.00. You had placed the watch in the coat pocket on the way to the restaurant when you realized it was not keeping time and the battery was probably dead.
If you file a claim against the restaurant, what legal principles would apply? Would you be able to successfully recover? If yes, how much would the restaurant be liable to pay?
After posting, respond to two classmates. In each response, agree or disagree with the conclusions offered and explain your support for that agreement or disagreement. Provide sources where appropriate.
Before posting, please review the
LAW2005 Discussion Rubric (.docx)
All initial posts should be posted by 4/13 at 11:59 pm ET. Respond to at least two of your classmates by 4/16 at 11:59 pm ET.
Textbook Readings:
Washington State Hospitality Law Manual
Part I, Chapter 6
Outlining the evolution of the law with respect to a hotel’s liability for a guest’s property, this Chapter also informs students of who is liable for the loss or damage to property under current statutory and common law rules.
Part I, Chapter 7
of bailment.
WASHINGTON STATE HOSPITALITY LAW MANUAL
Third Edition
© Copyright 2012 by Irvin W. Sandman and Washington Lodging Association
Editors and Contributors
Editor-in-Chief and Contributor:
Irvin Sandman, Sandman Savrann PLLC
Associate Editors and Contributors:
Bryan Helfer and Nathan Luce, Foster Pepper PLLC
Samantha Noonan, Williams Kastner
Andria Ryan, Fisher & Phillips LLP
Sandip Soli, Cairncross & Hempelmann P.S.
Assistant Editor and Contributor:
Janice Goh, University of Washington Law School Intern
With special thanks for his authorship of earlier editions and his contributions to this third edition:
Dennis McLaughlin, Dennis McLaughlin & Associates PS
30704 00004472 v9
Table of Contents
ABOUT THE EDITORS AND CONTRIBUTORS …………………………………………………………………………. 1
USE OF THIS MANUAL ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
PREFACE …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
PART I : THE INNKEEPER AND ITS GUEST………………………………………………………………………………. 11
Chapter 1 : Innkeeper’s Duty To Receive Guests And Its Right To Refuse Guests ………………….. 11
1.1.
Duty to Receive Guests ………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
1.2.
Federal Law ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
1.3.
Washington Law………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
1.4.
Limited Right to Refuse Guests …………………………………………………………………………….. 15
1.5.
Parties for Underage Guests…………………………………………………………………………………. 16
1.6.
Summaries and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 18
Chapter 2 : Guest Reservations ………………………………………………………………………………………… 20
2.1.
Form and Effect of Agreement ……………………………………………………………………………… 20
2.2.
Hotel Remedies …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 22
2.3.
Guest Remedies ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 22
2.4.
Overbooking ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 23
2.5.
Catering, Banquet, Meeting and Convention Contracts ………………………………………….. 23
2.6.
Gift Certificates and Cards ……………………………………………………………………………………. 24
2.7.
Summaries and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 24
i
Chapter 3 : The Innkeeper’s Right To Evict A Guest, Tenant, Patron Or Others …………………….. 26
3.1.
Distinction Between Guest and Tenant …………………………………………………………………. 26
3.2.
Eviction Rights in General …………………………………………………………………………………….. 26
3.3.
Application of Criminal Laws. ……………………………………………………………………………….. 27
3.4.
Eviction for Violation of Hotel Policies …………………………………………………………………… 27
3.5.
Eviction for Overstaying……………………………………………………………………………………….. 28
3.6.
Eviction Due To Illness …………………………………………………………………………………………. 28
3.7.
Eviction of Persons Other Than Guests………………………………………………………………….. 29
3.8.
Summaries and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 30
Chapter 4 : Guest Rights To Privacy ………………………………………………………………………………….. 31
4.1.
The Innkeeper’s Right to Protect the Guest’s Privacy ……………………………………………… 31
4.2.
The Innkeeper’s Obligation to Protect the Guest’s Privacy ……………………………………… 33
4.3.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………… 34
Chapter 5 : The Innkeeper’s Duty to Protect Guests from Injury …………………………………………. 35
5.1.
Reasonable Care Rule ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 35
5.2.
Contributory v. Comparative Negligence……………………………………………………………….. 36
5.3.
Violation of Laws and Regulations—Negligence “Per se” ………………………………………… 37
5.4.
Cases: Fact Patterns and Decisions ………………………………………………………………………. 38
5.5.
Keys and Access Cards …………………………………………………………………………………………. 44
5.6.
Acts of Hotel Employees ………………………………………………………………………………………. 45
5.7.
Acts of Other Guests and Patrons …………………………………………………………………………. 46
5.8.
Use of Exculpatory Language ……………………………………………………………………………….. 47
5.9.
Hotel Security Tips ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 47
ii
5.10.
Working with Insurers and Counsel ……………………………………………………………………. 49
5.11.
Summaries and Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………………… 50
Chapter 6 : The Innkeeper’s Liability for Guest Property …………………………………………………….. 52
6.1.
Washington State Statutes Limiting Liability ………………………………………………………….. 52
6.2.
“Valuables” …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 53
6.3.
Other Personal Property ………………………………………………………………………………………. 55
6.4.
Unclaimed Property …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 55
6.5.
Handling Mail for Hotel Guests …………………………………………………………………………….. 56
6.6.
“Intangible Property”…………………………………………………………………………………………… 56
6.7.
Liability for Guest Vehicles …………………………………………………………………………………… 57
6.8.
Training………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 57
6.9.
Statutes of Limitation ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 58
6.10.
Insurance ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 58
6.11.
Summaries and Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………………… 58
Chapter 7 : The Innkeeper’s Liability for Loss of Property of Persons Other Than Guests ………. 60
7.1.
General Nature of Liability……………………………………………………………………………………. 60
7.2.
“Valuables” …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 61
7.3.
Liability for Other Personal Property …………………………………………………………………….. 61
7.4.
Vehicles ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 62
7.5.
Training and Defenses …………………………………………………………………………………………. 64
7.6.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………… 64
Chapter 8 : Frauds Committed Against Innkeepers…………………………………………………………….. 65
8.1.
Criminal and Civil Statutes ……………………………………………………………………………………. 65
iii
8.2.
Credit Card Fraud ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 65
8.3.
Bad Checks …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 66
8.4.
“Skips” ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 67
8.5.
Collections of Delinquent Accounts ………………………………………………………………………. 68
8.6.
Lien Statutes……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 70
8.7.
Theft of Hotel Property………………………………………………………………………………………… 70
8.8.
Detention of Guests …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 72
8.9.
Crime Prevention ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 72
8.10.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………… 73
Chapter 9 : Consumer Protection Laws Affecting Innkeepers ……………………………………………… 75
9.1.
The Federal Truth-in-Lending Act………………………………………………………………………….. 75
9.2.
State Laws on Credit Reporting …………………………………………………………………………….. 75
9.3.
Posting Rates ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 75
9.4.
Truth-in-Menu and Labeling Laws…………………………………………………………………………. 76
9.5.
No-Smoking Laws ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 77
9.6.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………… 79
Chapter 10 : Deceased Guests………………………………………………………………………………………….. 80
10.1.
Who to Call—the Role of County Coroner and the Police …………………………………….. 80
10.2.
Inventory of the Property of the Deceased Guest ……………………………………………….. 80
10.3.
Release of Property and Tax Waiver…………………………………………………………………… 80
10.4.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………… 81
Chapter 11 : Hotel Rules, Policies, and Procedures …………………………………………………………….. 82
11.1.
At Whom are Rules, Policies, and Procedures Directed? ……………………………………… 82
iv
11.2.
Sources of Rules, Policies and Procedures ………………………………………………………….. 82
11.3.
Crisis Management Policies ………………………………………………………………………………. 82
11.4.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………… 83
PART II : THE INNKEEPER AND ITS EMPLOYEES……………………………………………………………………… 84
Chapter 1 : Wage And Hour Laws Applicable To Employees ……………………………………………….. 85
1.1.
Coverage of Federal and State Laws ……………………………………………………………………… 85
1.2.
Exemptions…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 86
1.3.
Minimum Wage Rates Under Federal and State Law ……………………………………………… 89
1.4.
Computing Hours Worked ……………………………………………………………………………………. 90
1.5.
Computing the Regular Rate and Overtime Pay ……………………………………………………… 94
1.6.
Child Labor Laws: Federal and Washington State ………………………………………………….. 95
1.7.
Employment vs. Independent Contractors …………………………………………………………….. 99
1.8.
Employment vs. Volunteer Status ……………………………………………………………………….. 101
1.9.
Employment vs. Trainee Or Student Status ………………………………………………………….. 101
1.10.
Wage Payment ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 101
1.11.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………. 103
Chapter 2 : FICA and FUTA Taxes, Meals and Lodging, Uniforms, Student Employees,
Recordkeeping and Tip Credit, Reporting and Pooling ………………………………………………………. 105
2.1.
Federal Social Security & Medicare and Federal Unemployment …………………………… 105
2.2.
Meals and Lodging …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 105
2.3.
Uniform Maintenance ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 106
2.4.
Student Employees ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 107
2.5.
Record Keeping …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 108
v
2.6.
Tip Reporting and Tip Credit……………………………………………………………………………….. 109
2.7.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 110
Chapter 3 : Laws Against Discrimination in Employment…………………………………………………… 112
3.1.
Federal and State Laws: An Overview …………………………………………………………………. 112
3.2.
Sex Discrimination……………………………………………………………………………………………… 114
3.3.
Sexual Harassment…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 116
3.4.
Age Discrimination …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 122
3.5.
Race and Color Discrimination ……………………………………………………………………………. 124
3.6.
Religious Discrimination …………………………………………………………………………………….. 125
3.7.
National Origin Discrimination ……………………………………………………………………………. 126
3.8.
Marital Status ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 126
3.9.
Disability Discrimination …………………………………………………………………………………….. 127
3.10.
Affirmative Action ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 131
3.11.
Discrimination in Advertising for Employment ………………………………………………….. 131
3.12.
The “Do’s and Don’ts” of the Employee Interview …………………………………………….. 132
3.13.
Preventive Measures………………………………………………………………………………………. 135
3.14.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………. 137
Chapter 4 : Employment Testing …………………………………………………………………………………….. 139
4.1.
Use of Polygraphs ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 139
4.2.
Substance Abuse Testing ……………………………………………………………………………………. 140
4.3.
Drug Addiction and Alcoholism …………………………………………………………………………… 140
4.4.
Medical Marijuana …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 141
4.5.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 142
vi
Chapter 5 : Employee Termination …………………………………………………………………………………. 143
5.1.
“At Will” Status …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 143
5.2.
Documentation …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 144
5.3.
Investigation and Documentation……………………………………………………………………….. 144
5.4.
Record Keeping …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 145
5.5.
Review of Employee Files …………………………………………………………………………………… 145
5.6.
Termination Interview ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 146
5.7.
Notice of Termination………………………………………………………………………………………… 146
5.8.
Exit Interviews …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 146
5.9.
Severance Agreement and Release……………………………………………………………………… 148
5.10.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………. 149
PART III : GENERAL INNKEEPER OPERATION ……………………………………………………………………….. 150
Chapter 1 : Licensing And Regulation Of Hotels ……………………………………………………………….. 151
1.1.
State Regulation – Transient Accommodations …………………………………………………….. 151
1.2.
Maintenance of Guest Registers …………………………………………………………………………. 151
1.3.
License Requirements………………………………………………………………………………………… 152
1.4.
Inspections by the Department of Health ……………………………………………………………. 156
1.5.
Powers and Duties of Department………………………………………………………………………. 157
1.6.
Local Regulation ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 158
1.7.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 158
Chapter 2 : Public Health And Safety Requirements …………………………………………………………. 160
2.1.
Building Codes …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 160
2.2.
Laws, Regulations, and Liability Relating to Food………………………………………………….. 161
vii
2.3.
WAC 246-360 Transient Accommodations ………………………………………………………….. 165
2.4.
Swimming Pools ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 166
2.5.
Contagious Diseases ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 166
2.6.
Laws Regarding Aid to Choking Victims ……………………………………………………………….. 167
2.7.
Signage …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 167
2.8.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 168
Chapter 3 : Fire Safety Laws …………………………………………………………………………………………… 170
3.1.
Fire Safety Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 170
3.2.
State and Local Fire Legislation …………………………………………………………………………… 170
3.3.
Federal Fire And Emergency Legislation ………………………………………………………………. 171
3.4.
Court Cases……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 173
3.5.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 175
Chapter 4 : Occupational Safety And Health Act (OSHA) …………………………………………………… 177
4.1.
Hotel Management Responsibilities ……………………………………………………………………. 178
4.2.
Reporting and Record Keeping Requirements ……………………………………………………… 180
4.3.
Posting Requirements………………………………………………………………………………………… 180
4.4.
Inspections and Citations: Employers’ and Employees’ Rights and Remedies…………. 181
4.5.
Accident Prevention Programs ……………………………………………………………………………. 183
4.6.
Violence in the Workplace………………………………………………………………………………….. 183
4.7.
Ergonomics ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 184
4.8.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 184
Chapter 5 : Antitrust Laws and the Operation and Marketing of Hotels……………………………… 186
5.1.
General Overview of Antitrust Laws ……………………………………………………………………. 186
viii
5.2.
Special Application to Certain Hotel Practices ………………………………………………………. 188
5.3.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 192
Chapter 6 : Washington Law Relating To Alcoholic Beverages …………………………………………… 194
6.1.
General Nature of Control by State……………………………………………………………………… 194
6.2.
Application for and Issuance of Licenses ……………………………………………………………… 194
6.3.
Hotel License …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 195
6.4.
Motel License ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 197
6.5.
Initiative 1183 …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 198
6.6.
Public Safety ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 199
6.7.
Liability for Serving Alcoholic Beverages to Minors……………………………………………….. 200
6.8.
Liability for Serving Alcoholic Beverages to Intoxicated Persons…………………………….. 200
6.9.
Books and Records …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 202
6.10.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………. 203
Chapter 7 : Americans With Disabilities Act—Title III ……………………………………………………….. 206
7.1.
The ADA’s Application to Hotels …………………………………………………………………………. 206
7.2.
Enforcement……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 207
7.3.
General Compliance Requirements for Facilities ………………………………………………….. 208
7.4.
The Pool Lift Controversy …………………………………………………………………………………… 211
7.5.
Separately-Owned Hotel Rooms …………………………………………………………………………. 211
7.6.
Service Animals …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 212
7.7.
Policies and Procedures: Reservations Systems …………………………………………………… 213
7.8.
Effective Communication …………………………………………………………………………………… 214
7.9.
Washington Law………………………………………………………………………………………………… 214
ix
7.10.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………. 216
Chapter 8 : USA Patriot Act…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 219
8.1.
Access to Hotel Records …………………………………………………………………………………….. 219
8.2.
Money Laundering and Suspicious Financial Transactions …………………………………….. 219
8.3.
Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) ………………………………………………………………. 220
8.4.
Immunity for Hotels in Compliance …………………………………………………………………….. 221
8.5.
Patriot Act Renewal …………………………………………………………………………………………… 221
8.6.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 222
Chapter 9 : Use and Protection of Music, Television Signals, and other Work …………………….. 223
9.1.
Music. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 223
9.2.
Unauthorized Interception of Cable Television Broadcasts ……………………………………. 227
9.3.
Vicarious Liability for Infringement by Guests (Downloading/Uploading) – The DMCA227
9.4.
Summary and Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………. 229
Chapter 10 : New Media and Hotel Marketing—Hotel Websites, Use of Images, Social Media,
OTAs and Online Review Sites …………………………………………………………………………………………. 230
10.1. The Hotel’s Website: Liability Issues and Recommendations for Terms and
Conditions ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 230
10.2.
Publication of Photographic and Video Images—Ownership and Copyright Issues . 238
10.3.
Social Media…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 240
10.4.
Online Travel Agents (OTAs) ……………………………………………………………………………. 244
10.5.
Online Review Sites ………………………………………………………………………………………… 247
10.6.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………. 252
Chapter 11 : Room Taxation In Washington State ……………………………………………………………. 254
11.1.
State Retail Sales Taxes …………………………………………………………………………………… 254
x
11.2.
Implications of the Transient/Non-Transient Distinction ……………………………………. 254
11.3.
General Local Option Sales Taxes …………………………………………………………………….. 256
11.4.
Hotel-Specific Excise Taxes………………………………………………………………………………. 256
11.5.
Business & Occupation Tax ……………………………………………………………………………… 257
11.6.
Tourism Promotion Areas ……………………………………………………………………………….. 261
11.7.
Summary and Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………. 262
Chapter 12 : Hotel Ownership Matters—an Overview ……………………………………………………… 264
12.1.
The Players…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 264
12.2.
The Branded HMA ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 265
12.3.
Non-branded HMAs ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 267
12.4.
Franchise Agreements…………………………………………………………………………………….. 268
12.5.
Asset Managers ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 270
12.6.
Equity Structures ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 270
12.7.
Debt Financing ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 271
12.8.
Manager-Lender Relationships ………………………………………………………………………… 272
12.9.
Summary and Conclusions. ……………………………………………………………………………… 273
xi
ABOUT THE EDITORS AND CONTRIBUTORS
Irvin Sandman, Editor-in-chief and contributor.
Irv is a principal of Sandman Savrann PLLC, a law firm devoted to providing
comprehensive legal counsel to the hospitality industry. The firm’s recognized hospitality
industry counselors lead a team of multidisciplinary professionals, bringing to bear hotel
industry knowledge, experience, and connections to help hoteliers, developers and
investors succeed. The firm helps clients develop, acquire, and structure hotels,
successfully license, brand, and manage them, and resolve disputes arising from their
operation and contracts. Over the last twenty years, Irv has served as counsel in
thousands of hotel matters and transactions regionally, nationally, and internationally. He
has written and spoken extensively about legal and business concepts and strategies to
help industry stakeholders anticipate trends and succeed in changing circumstances. In
2008, Irv received the Anthony G. Marshall Hospitality Law Award, given annually to a
single attorney for pioneering and lasting contributions to the field of hospitality law. Irv
immediate past president of the Hospitality Industry Bar Association. Irv can be reached
at 206-686-0802, isandman@sandsav.com. The Sandman Savrann website is at
www.sandmansavrann.com.
Associate Editors and Contributors:
Bryan Helfer
Bryan is an attorney with Foster Pepper PLLC. He represents clients in single property and
portfolio real estate transactions, including sales and acquisitions, financing,
reorganizations, retail/office leases, land development, workouts and closings. He drafts
and negotiates purchase and sale agreements, loan agreements, and commercial leases,
and has experience drafting organizational documents, including operating agreements,
joint ventures and corporate resolutions. Bryan is a graduate of The University of
Michigan Law School (J.D., 2006), Keio University in Tokyo, Japan (2002) and University of
California at Los Angeles (B.A., 2000).
Bryan can be reached 206-447-6218,
helfb@foster.com. The Foster Pepper website is at www.foster.com.
Nathan Luce
Nathan is an attorney with Foster Pepper PLLC. Nathan’s practice focuses on real estate
law and related litigation with an emphasis on representing buyers, sellers and lenders in
acquisitions, dispositions, development, leasing and financing of commercial, retail and
1
multi-family projects. He also has experience in the area of mergers and acquisitions,
working with both buyers and sellers in a variety of commercial transactions. Nathan is a
graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law (J.D., 2011) and the University of
Washington (B.A., 2006). Nathan can be reached 206-447-7264, lucen@foster.com. The
Foster Pepper website is at www.foster.com.
Samantha Noonan.
Samantha (Sam) is an associate in the Seattle office of Williams Kastner. Her experience
includes a range of practice areas including commercial litigation, labor and employment,
international and hospitality law. Sam graduated from the Cornell University School of
Hotel Administration. She earned her J.D., cum laude, from Seattle University School of
Law where she served as an Associate Editor of the Seattle University Law Review and
President of the Women’s Law Caucus. Prior to her legal career, Sam served as an officer
in the United States Navy aboard a guided missile destroyer and deployed to the Middle
East in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Following active duty, she was employed
as a manager at the Fairmont Olympic Hotel. Sam currently serves on the boards of the
Asian Bar Association of Washington and the Seafair Foundation. She also volunteers her
time as a pro bono attorney with the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (NWIRP). Sam
can be reached at 206-233-2890, snoonan@williamskastner.com. The Williams Kastner
website is at Savrann website is at www.williamskastner.com.
Andria Ryan,
Andria is a partner in the law firm of Fisher & Phillips LLP, which is one of the country’s
oldest and largest firms devoted exclusively to representing employers in labor,
employment, civil rights, employee benefits and business immigration law. Although
Atlanta-based, Fisher & Phillips has 270 lawyers in 27 offices across the country. Andria
joined the law firm in 1988. Ms. Ryan received her bachelor’s degree from American
University in Washington, D.C. in 1985 and received her law degree from Catholic
University in 1988. In 2005, Andria served as Chair of the State Bar of Georgia’s Labor and
Employment Law Section. Andria is an AV rated lawyer and chairs the firm’s Hospitality
Practice Group. She represents numerous hospitality employers throughout the United
States in various phases of labor and employment law. Andria serves as an active
member on the American Hotel and Lodging Association’s Human Resources Committee.
She has been honored by the Colorado Hotel and Lodging Association and the South
Carolina Hospitality Association for valuable contributions by an Allied member.
Sandip Soli
2
Sandip Soli is a partner in the law firm of Cairncross & Hempelmann, and leads its Retail,
Hotel & Restaurant practice group. Sandip assists hospitality clients in the acquisition,
development, leasing and operation of hotel and restaurant assets. He also advises
hospitality clients on liquor licensing and regulation compliance issues. Further, Sandip
represents clients in litigation, arbitration and mediation to resolve disputes. Sandip
serves as outside general counsel to the Washington Restaurant Association and is an
active member of the Washington Lodging Association.
Assistant Editor and Contributor:
Janice Goh
Janice is a third year law student at the University of Washington. Janice grew up in
Singapore and is fluent in both Mandarin and English. Since beginning law school, Janice
has worked at the Washington State Court of Appeals and the Attorney General’s Office.
Prior to law school, Janice worked at the US Embassy in Singapore and as a paralegal at an
immigration law firm. Janice graduated from the University of Washington with degrees
in Psychology and International Relations.
Special contributor and author of the first and second editions of the Manual:
Dennis McLaughlin.
Dennis is the principal in the Spokane law firm of Dennis McLaughlin & Associates, P.S.
From 1993 to the present, Dennis serves as general counsel to the Washington Lodging
Association. Dennis was the recipient of the Washington State Hotel & Motel
Association’s Outstanding Service Award in 2000. He received the Spokane Regional
Convention and Visitor Bureau’s Lifetime Achievement Award in 2006. From 1978 to the
present, Dennis serves as general counsel of the Spokane Regional Convention and
Visitor’s Bureau. He also serves as general counsel to the Spokane Hotel-Motel
Association. He has assisted numerous local hotel associations with their incorporation as
well as the formation of tourism promotion area ordinances. Dennis is a 1963 Graduate
of Washington State University and received his Juris Doctorate from the University of
Idaho in 1966. Dennis can be reached at 509-624-3525, dennis@dmassoc.cnc.net.
3
USE OF THIS MANUAL
This Manual discusses legal topics impacting hotels and hotel operations in
Washington. It is intended to provide education and general understanding about some of the
significant legal issues facing hotels and their operation. This Manual does not, however,
discuss in detail, or from every possible perspective, all the laws and regulations affecting
hotels in Washington.
Also, this Manual it is not legal advice. Before you make any legal decision impacting
your business, you should consult with your counsel, who should be experienced in hotel
matters, and any of this Manual’s cited authority should be verified and updated. By using this
Manual, you acknowledge and agree than none of the authors, contributors or editors are
liable to you or to any other person for any action you take as a result of your use of this
Manual.
Please also understand that the federal and state laws and regulations that impact
hotels in Washington are constantly changing. Although the Washington Lodging Association
intends to provide updates from time to time, care should be taken by you and your counsel
to make sure that the most current laws are known and understood when you consider your
response to any legal issue.
4
PREFACE
When Dennis McLaughlin finished the second edition of the Washington Hospitality Law
Manual in 1999, the world was a different place. We had yet to experience the 9/11 attacks on
the World Trade Center, and there was no Patriot Act. There was no Facebook, no Twitter, and
no Social Media of any kind. Expedia was just a small division of Microsoft, and less than 2% of all
travel trade was booked online.
Jan Simon, the president of the Washington Lodging Association (WLA), contacted me in
2011 and expressed her belief that the Washington Hospitality Law Manual should be brought
into the 21st Century. I readily agreed, and when she asked me to take on the task, I accepted.
The value of Dennis McLaughlin’s work on the first two editions of the Manual cannot be
overstated. The Manual has been an important reference tool for Washington hoteliers and
lawyers, and I personally have kept a copy of the Manual by my desk for many years.
Because I had received much positive feedback on the second edition, I felt that the third
edition should follow the foundation and the tone Dennis set. The overall organization of the
second edition and its easy-to-read style have been preserved.
I felt the creation of the third edition also presented a good opportunity for law firms in
the legal community to work together to benefit the hotel industry. I’m pleased that my friends
at four other law firms joined in the effort and served with diligence and skill as editors and
contributors: Samantha Noonan (Williams Kastner), Sandip Soli (Cairncross & Hempelmann),
Bryan Helfer and Nathan Luce (Foster Pepper), and Andria Ryan (Fisher & Phillips). Our effort was
also greatly assisted by Janice Goh, our capable intern from the University of Washington School
of Law.
The third edition adds new cases, analyzes many changes in the law, and includes several
new sections and chapters. These additions address topics such as: gift cards; working with
insurers when lawsuits arise; Washington’s version of the National Food Code; no-smoking laws;
updated wage and hour rules; tip pooling; the 2009 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act; sexual
harassment; reductions in work force; medical marijuana; antitrust laws and “call arounds”; the
hotel liquor license; Initiative 1183; the new ADA Title III laws and rules; the Patriot Act; music
copyright issues arising from hotels’ pervasive video screens; new media and hotel marketing;
new B&O tax issues for hotels; and TPAs. A chapter on hotel ownership matters has also been
added to give hotel managers an overview of the underlying structural and contractual context
within which they operate and are judged.
The third edition also builds on Dennis’s effort to make the Manual user-friendly. Section
numbering has been added, appendices have been replaced with links to internet resources, and
summaries have been included at the end of each chapter. We have also tried to save words,
5
when possible. For example, we use the word “hotel” to refer to both hotels and motels, since
the law almost always treats these facilities the same way.
I hope the Third Edition of the Washington Hospitality Manual will provide you with new
insights about your legal environment, strategies to help you avoid and prevent legal dangers,
and a clearer path to success in our increasingly complex world.
Irv Sandman
Sandman Savrann PLLC
6
INTRODUCTION
Historical Underpinnings of Hospitality Law
The foundations of hospitality law began in England during the Middle Ages. The English
common law, as it developed over several hundred years, imposed duties on the innkeeper that
were strictly construed against the innkeeper and in favor of the guest of the inn.
During the Middle Ages, an innkeeper was considered to be part of a “lowly profession”.
A quote from W.C. Firebaugh’s The Inns of the Middle Ages (Chicago: P. Covici, 1924, p. 12)
states:
[I]n the eyes of the law, the innkeeper, the panderer, and others of like standing
were on the same footing … . [I]innkeepers were not admitted to military service,
nor did they form a guild, as did other tradesmen. In past ages, the tavern and
innkeeper have been guide, philosopher, and friend to all the evil reprobates in his
neighborhood. His establishment was a sanctuary and base of operation for every
cut-purse who stalked his quarry along the trade routes or in the rear guard of
marching legions. He was their fence, and his commission was always paid.
In the Middle Ages, the typical “inn” consisted of one large room where meals were
eaten, and at night the tables were moved to make way for the guests’ beds. If an inn became
successful, additional rooms were added to offer sleeping rooms for the guests, separate and
apart from the eating and drinking rooms.
The primary aim of English common law, as it developed over time, was to protect the
guest and ensure that he was provided food, drink, shelter, and security. These services came to
be considered “public services.” “Innkeeping” thus became a “public business” or “public calling”
regulated by the King of England.
The early development of common law imposed certain duties on the innkeeper that still
have legal significance today. These duties were based on the following principals:
•
Public Service. The innkeeper has a public duty to supply food, drink, safety and
shelter to traveler(s). The innkeeper is to serve the traveling public. The inn itself is a
“Public House.”
•
Duty to Receive Guests. The innkeeper has a duty to receive all guests who properly
apply for admission to the inn.
•
Duty to Provide Services and Facilities. The facility itself must be in good repair, and
the staff of the innkeeper must be trained to provide proper services and protection to
the traveling public.
7
•
Duty to Charge in a Reasonable Manner. An innkeeper may not charge unreasonable
fees for services and accommodations in order to exclude unwanted guests.
•
Duty to Not discriminate. An innkeeper has a duty to the general public, and must
serve the public without discrimination.
•
Duty to Receive Strangers. An innkeeper has the duty to admit a stranger as a guest,
but a person who is not a guest has no right to remain against the objection of the
innkeeper.
•
Duty to Protect Property of the Guest. An innkeeper is liable as an “insurer” for the
loss of a guest’s property brought to the inn.
The Development of Hospitality Law in Washington
Washington’s hospitality law evolved from these early, basic common law duties.
Washington was admitted as a state in 1890, and in the 1905 Legislative Session the legislature
passed laws governing the rights and duties of the innkeeper.
These early laws softened some of the English common law duties of the innkeeper,
particularly the duty to act as an “insurer” of guest property. See PART I, Chapter 6. Since the
time this early legislation was enacted, the Washington courts have handed down only a handful
of reported decisions that apply the legislation and the English common law principles that
predate it.
Beginning in the 1960s, however, legislators, courts and regulators made up for lost time.
Modern laws impacting the hospitality industry have burgeoned at the federal, state, and local
levels. Hotels in Washington are now subject to numerous statutes governing a multitude of
subjects never considered by the common law. Federal and Washington courts and
administrative agencies have further defined and refined the dictates of statutory law as it applies
to the hospitality industry.
Basic Legal Framework for Understanding “Applicable Law”
This Manual discusses different levels of statutory law, regulations, and court-made law.
To understand this “applicable law,” it is helpful to be aware of the basic legal framework within
which this law is created and becomes “applicable” to hotels in Washington.
The law in the United States, has two distinct sources: federal law and state law. Both
federal and state law impact hotels in Washington.
Federal law is primarily based on federal statutes and the United States Constitution.
Under the Constitution, the federal government has “limited” powers and jurisdiction. For
example, Congress can only pass laws that are of the kind specifically permitted by the
8
Constitution. Jurisdiction over all other legal matters is reserved for the states. Over the years,
the Constitutional underpinnings of federal power have been interpreted by the Supreme Court
to allow quite expansive federal legislation. Many federal laws are based on Congress’s
Constitutional authority to pass laws that affect “interstate commerce.” Early in our country’s
history, not much “interstate commerce” existed. In modern times, however, virtually all
commerce is “interstate” in some respect. Accordingly, federal law can and does impact a wide
variety of activities that occur in the operation of a hotel.
The courts in the federal court system, under the leadership of the United States Supreme
Court, decide primarily “federal questions”—i.e., questions and issues arising under federal
statutes, including the United States Constitution. The federal courts are divided into thirteen
“circuits” nationwide. Each circuit includes the federal courts sitting in several states. For
example, Oregon and Washington are both part of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As cases
are decided across the nation, each circuit’s Court of Appeals establishes federal law, or “case
law” precedents within that particular circuit. When a circuit’s Court of Appeals reviews an issue,
the court may look to another circuit for guidance. But it is not obligated to follow what another
circuit has decided. Each circuit follows its own precedents and the precedents established by
the Supreme Court of the United States.
Washington State, like all states in the U.S., has “general jurisdiction” over all matters.
The Washington legislature can enact any kind of legislation, with two primary exceptions: a
state cannot enact legislation that is contrary to the United States Consitution (including the Bill
of Rights); and a state cannot enact legislation that either contradicts properly enacted federal
statutes or that legislates a subject that is completely “preempted” by extensive federal
legislation on that subject.
Washington courts, similarly, are courts of general jurisdiction. They can hear and resolve
any dispute on any matter, including cases arising under common law (such as the court-made
law on torts) and under statutes. Thus, Washington has its own court system, develops its own
case law, and thus creates judicial precedents on hospitality law and other issues. In Washington,
a case may be appealed to the Washington State Court of Appeals or the Washington Supreme
Court. If a federal question is involved, then the case can be transferred from a state court to a
federal court or, if the case is allowed to go all the way to the Washington Supreme Court, a
litigant can request review by the United States Supreme Court.
Just as federal “circuits” are independent of one another, our state courts are
independent of other state jurisdictions. Thus, an Oregon state court decision involving a
hospitality law issue is not binding on a Washington state court looking at the same issue.
However, a Washington court may find an Oregon case “persuasive” in its consideration of a
Washington matter, and so the Oregon decision may influence in the Washington court’s
determination of an matter.
9
Statutory References in this Manual
In this Manual, “RCW” refers to the Revised Code of Washington—the volumes in which
Washington statutory law is found. All laws passed by the Washington State Legislature are
available online at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx.
The Washington statutes often authorize the executive branch of our state government
(e.g., the Department of Revenue) to promulgate rules and regulations that supplement the
statutes. These rules and regulations are contained in the Washington Administrative Code, cited
in this manual as the “WAC.” This code is also available online at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac.
Federal statues are found in the United States Code, cited in this Manual as “U.S.C.”
Federal rules and regulations are found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). These federal
statutes and regulations are not as easy to find online as the Washington codes, but they are
available in local law libraries.
10
PART I: THE INNKEEPER AND ITS GUEST
Chapter 1: Innkeeper’s Duty To Receive Guests And Its Right To Refuse Guests
1.1.
Duty to Receive Guests
As indicated in the Introduction, the innkeeper’s duty to receive travelers is derived from
the public nature of innkeeping. An innkeeper is under a general common law duty to serve
every member of the public without discrimination.
Under Washington State law and federal law, an innkeeper’s public duty to receive guests
has been expanded and made more specific by the federal and state constitutions and civil rights
laws. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000; RCW 49.60, et seq. These laws recognize that a hotel is a place of
“public accommodation,” and, as such, an innkeeper is obliged to provide service and
accommodation without discrimination.
Anti-discrimination enforcement agencies in Washington State have overlapping
jurisdiction. In Seattle, for example, a hotel is potentially subject to enforcement actions by the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Washington State Human Rights Commission,
and the Seattle Human Rights Commission.
1.2.
Federal Law
The Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits places of “public accommodation” from
discriminating against any person on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin. Title II
of the Act (42 U.S.C. § 2000a) states:
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services,
facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of any place of public
accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation
on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin.
The Act defines a “place of public accommodation” to include hotels, motels, inns,
taverns, roadhouses and bar-rooms, as well as many other places. Section § 201 of the Act (42.
U.S.C. § 2000a(b)) states:
Each of the following establishments which serves the public is a place of public
accommodation within the meaning of this title if its operations affect commerce
or if discrimination or segregation by it is supported by state action:
(1)
any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to
transient guests, other than an establishment located within a building
11
which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is
actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as his residence;
(2)
any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or
other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the
premises, including but not limited to, any such facility located on the
premises of any retail establishment; or any gasoline station;
Under federal case law, hotels do affect interstate commerce and thus fall within the
coverage of Act. See Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc., v. United States, 379 U.S. 241, 261, 13 L.Ed. 2d
258 (1964).
A person who alleges discriminatory acts by a hotel or other “place of public
accommodation” may bring a civil action in federal district court to seek “injunctive relief” or
other order offering relief to the aggrieved party. Id. The court may award costs and attorneys
fees, but the Act does not provide for monetary awards for damages.
In addition to any civil action brought by an individual, the United States Attorney General
is authorized to bring a civil action on behalf of the general public as citizens of the United States
if there is “reasonable cause to believe that any person, or group of persons, is engaged in a
pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment” of any of the rights provided to all citizens
of the United States by Title II. Id. at 248-249.
The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq.) has
also impacted the ability of innkeepers to turn away guests. The ADA prohibits discrimination on
the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages, or accommodation by any person who owns, leases, or operates a place of public
accommodation. 42 U.S.C. § 121 (a). The ADA is discussed in more detail in Part II Chapter 7.
1.3.
Washington Law
Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (RCW 49.60) states:
Freedom from discrimination – Declaration of civil rights.
(1)
The right to be free from discrimination because of race, creed,
color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual
orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the
use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability is
recognized as and declared to be a civil right. This right shall include, but not be
limited to:
12
… (b)
The right to the full enjoyment of any of the
accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of any place of public resort,
accommodation, assemblage, or amusement….
RCW 49.60.030.
A person who alleges discriminatory acts in violation of RCW 49.60 may bring a civil action
in state court to enjoin further violations, to recover actual damages, compensatory damages,
and costs of suit (including reasonable attorneys’ fees), or to obtain any other remedy authorized
by the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964. RCW 49.60.030(2).
An illustrative case is Woodhouse v. Motel 6 G.P., Inc. (U.S. District Court, E. Wa.) Case No.
CY-93-3008-AAM unpublished opinion-1993). On March 15, 1992, Woodhouse, an AfricanAmerican male, sought to register at the Motel 6 in Yakima. The motel’s desk clerk stated that no
rooms were available. Woodhouse returned to his car and told his girlfriend, who was Caucasian,
to try to get a room. The girlfriend proceeded back to the front desk and was granted
accommodations for the night. Plaintiff’s trial memorandum stated that the manager of the
Motel 6 “had asked clerks to deny rooms to ethnic and racial groups because they were dirty and
more likely to deal drugs.” The memorandum also alleged a long history of complaints of racial
and ethnic discrimination being sent to the national offices of Motel 6. Mr. Woodhouse’s
complaint alleged violations of 42 U.S.C. 1981, RCW 49.60.030, and Washington’s Consumer
Protection Act, RCW 19.86. He sought to recover general damages for humiliation, mental
anguish, and distress as a result of intentional race discrimination by Motel 6’s desk clerk. He also
sought to recover punitive damages for the reckless disregard for federally protected civil rights
or the intentional denial of civil rights. At trial, the jury awarded Mr. Woodhouse general
damages in the amount of $25,000 and punitive damages in the amount of $150,000. The motel
appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and the 9th Circuit reversed the decision of the
District Court and ordered a new trial based on issues of improper evidence being admitted
during the jury trial. See 67 F. 3d. 310 (1995). After reversal, the case was settled by the parties
to avoid a second trial.
The Washington statute now specifically protects against discrimination on the basis of
military status (including the status of being an honorably discharged veteran). Accordingly,
discrimination against military personnel and these veterans is put on the same footing as the
other more traditionally prohibited forms of discrimination.
Hotel management in Washington State should have written policies and procedures as
well as training programs for all personnel. They should emphasize the hotel’s duty to provide
services and accommodations without discrimination because of race, creed, color, national
origin, sex, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability. See also PART III,
Chapter 7, for discussion of ADA requirements.
13
Note: Under Washington law, RCW 49.60.230, a grievant may file a complaint
with the Washington Human Rights Commission and name supervisors and
managers individually. The case may be heard by an administrative law judge,
and under RCW 49.250(5) the judge may impose various remedies, including
damages for humiliation and mental suffering up to $20,000.
Washington’s Law Against Discrimination also contains specific provisions that prohibit
“rate” and other discriminatory activities by lodging facilities. RCW 49.60.215 states:
It shall be an unfair practice for any person or the person’s agent or employee to
commit an act which directly or indirectly results in any distinction, restriction, or
discrimination, or the requiring of any person to pay a larger sum than the uniform
rates charged other persons, or the refusing or withholding from any person the
admission, patronage, custom, presence, frequenting, dwelling, staying, or lodging
in any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement, except
for conditions and limitations established by law and applicable to all persons,
regardless of race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, sex, honorably
discharged veteran or military status, status as a mother breastfeeding her child,
the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained
dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability: PROVIDED, That this
section shall not be construed to require structural changes, modifications, or
additions to make any place accessible to a person with a disability except as
otherwise required by law: PROVIDED, That behavior or actions constituting a risk
to property or other persons can be grounds for refusal and shall not constitute an
unfair practice.
This statute prohibits hotel management from charging any person, either directly or
indirectly, a larger sum than the uniform rates charged other guests for its accommodations
based on any “distinction, restriction, or discrimination.” Hotel management cannot discriminate
against unwanted travelers by demanding unreasonable compensation for accommodations.
This statute also provides that hotel management may not refuse accommodations to an
individual, except for conditions and limitations established by law and applicable to all persons,
based on race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, sex, honorably discharged veteran
or military status, status as a mother breastfeeding her child, the presence of any sensory,
mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with
a disability.
Note: RCW 49.60.215 expressly provides that hotel management may refuse to
provide accommodations to an individual whose behavior or actions would
constitute a risk to property or other persons.
14
It would be an unfair practice, and thus illegal, for a hotel in its advertising, whether by
circular or in newspapers, magazines, television or radio, to use any phrase or words indicating
that the hotel is discriminating in the selection of its guests on the basis of race, creed, color,
national origin, , sexual orientation, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, status as
a mother breastfeeding her child, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability.
To prevent potential discrimination claims, a hotel refusing a guest should adequately
document all reasons for refusing accommodations. Some states have laws that address
circumstances in which a hotel may properly refuse to admit a prospective guest. Washington
has not adopted such laws. Washington innkeepers are cautioned to consult with legal counsel
to identify and analyze any civil or criminal statutes addressing refusal of guests.
1.4.
Limited Right to Refuse Guests
There are circumstances when an innkeeper may lawfully refuse a traveler despite the
duty to accept all persons who apply. In a variety of court decisions from different jurisdictions,
courts have specified circumstances under which travelers can be refused accommodations
without liability. Note, however, that the following list is not necessarily reflective of decisions
made by our Washington courts. The right to refuse accommodations to persons may vary
depending on the facts and circumstances of your particular situation.
An innkeeper may refuse service or accommodation if:
The person requesting accommodation is under the influence of illegal drugs or
alcohol, or is disorderly so as to create a public nuisance.
The person requesting accommodation is suffering from a contagious disease
(AIDS is not a legal basis of refusal).
The person requesting accommodation is bringing property into the hotel which
the hotel does not customarily receive, such as a non-service related animal, or if the person is
bringing in property which may be dangerous to others or in violation of the law, such as illegal
drugs.
Note: The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) affords protections against discrimination
to Americans with disabilities. Under the ADA, a hotel may not refuse service to any guest
with a disability. Disability is defined by the ADA as “a physical or mental impairment that
substantially limits a major life activity” and may include blind, deaf-blind, or visually
impaired guests. The use of a trained dog guide by a blind, deaf or physically disabled
person cannot be a basis for denial of accommodations. See RCW 49.60.215 supra; see also
42 U.S.C. §§ 12111–12117. These issues are discussed further in Part III, Section Chapter 7.
15
Persons who have previously defrauded the inn or engaged in disruptive or
disorderly behavior.
services.
The person requesting accommodation is unwilling or unable to pay for hotel
The hotel has no accommodation to offer a person (see Part One, Chapter 2 on the
liability of a hotel if the person has a confirmed reservation).
Non-conformance to reasonable, non-discriminatory hotel rules.
The person requesting accommodation is exhibiting violent behavior.
The person requesting accommodation refuses to complete a registration form.
Always have your staff document in writing the reasons for refusing to provide
accommodations to any individual. Remember also that a hotel cannot refuse accommodations
to a person merely because the person arrives at an unusual hour, such as the middle of the
night. A hotel is presumed to be open for the reception of travelers at all times.
1.5.
Parties for Underage Guests
Prom and graduation parties have always been a problem to Washington’s hotel
management, especially when underage persons seek accommodations for “after hours” parties.
Washington State does not have a statute that specifically addresses the rights of innkeepers to
restrict the renting of rooms to minors.
Some hotels in Washington State refuse accommodations to underage persons in an
effort to avoid the disturbance of other guests due to drinking and late night parties. Other
hotels in Washington, however, provide accommodations to underage persons subject to strict
guidelines.
A hotel may refuse to provide service or accommodations to an individual under the age
of 18 years under the theory that a minor has no capacity to enter into a contract. RCW
26.28.015(4). This conclusion makes sense because, among other things, if an underage person
damages a hotel’s premises, the hotel would not have an enforceable contract upon which to
obtain contract damages from the guest.
Some legal authority indicates that refusing to provide accommodations to underage
persons is discriminatory and in violation of state anti-discrimination laws. This theory has not
been tested in a Washington court. Additionally,Washington’s Law Against Discrimination only
protects persons against age discrimination in an employment setting (see Part II, Chapter 3), but
it does not protect against age discrimination generally.
16
Despite some legal ambiguity as to the enforcement of age discrimination laws, it is clear
that hotel management can implement and enforce policies to protect guests from the harmful
acts of underage persons. It is also clear that a hotel can enforce policies regarding noise after
certain hours, alcohol in guest rooms, activities in hotel common areas after certain hours, and
the number of persons who may occupy one room at any time. These policies can be enforced as
long as they are reasonable, justified, and all guests are put on notice of the policies.
The following are tips on policies you should consider to protect your hotel’s
property and its guests:
•
Adopt a written policy with respect to providing rooms for parties (prom
and graduation) that hotel personnel can refer to when accepting
reservations or applications for rooms from minors. This policy should
also be added to the hotel website and/or emails confirming a guest
reservation so that the policy is a part of the contract with the guest. A
copy of hotel policy should be made available to guests upon check in.
•
The written policy should outline the rules and regulations for staying in
the hotel, including prohibition of illegal drugs and the underage
possession of alcohol in the rooms or on the premises.
•
Provide a copy of the rules to the guests and require the guest and the
parents to sign a form stating the guest has read and understands the
rules.
•
Consider requiring a refundable cash deposit to offset any damages for
the room.
•
Consider asking for a driver’s license and making a copy to place with the
registration.
•
Require at least one parent’s signature during the registration process of
a minor.
•
Make it clear in the rules that if eviction occurs, the guest will not receive
a refund on the room or the cash deposit if one has been received.
•
Consider hiring extra security personnel if the size of the party warrants
it. Some hotels have been sued because they have failed to have
sufficient security personnel to control the abusive behavior that
occurred.
•
Check the rooms while the guests are leaving to substantiate any claims
for damages.
17
Although an innkeeper may adopt a policy with respect to underage parties and take
other precautionary steps, events can occur that require involvement by hotel personnel.
Typically, other guests complain or the hotel management becomes aware of the undue noise
and disturbances. Hotel management must respond promptly to complaints and disturbances.
Often a warning is all that is required, but if hotel management discovers underage drinking,
different measures must be taken. If alcohol and drugs are involved, hotel management should
contact the underage occupants’ parents and the police.
If ejection is the only alternative, hotel management may need police presence.
Establish a relationship with the local police. Doing so can prevent various high-risk
situations, including an intoxicated minor who is evicted getting into his or her car
and driving off. The police and possibly the parents can help prevent these
situations from occurring and relieve the hotel of potential liability if an accident
occurs. Hotel management can also protect against liability by contractually
requiring parents’ signature(s) on the hotel registration card, or on a credit card
slip, which makes the parent liable for the actions of the minor.
Washington law provides that a hotel can sue the parent of a minor for damages totaling
less than $5,000, plus costs and attorneys’ fees, when the guest is a minor under 18 years of age,
lives with a parent, and willfully and maliciously destroys property or injures another person.
RCW 4.24.190.
1.6.
Summaries and Conclusions
The innkeeper’s public duty to receive guests is subject to federal and state laws on
freedom from discrimination.
A hotel is a “place of public accommodation” under the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964
and, as such, may not discriminate against any person on the grounds of race, color, religion or
national origin.
The Washington Law Against Discrimination defines a civil right to include freedom from
discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or
military status, sexual orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or
the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability. It also prevents
discrimination by hotels on the basis of status as a mother breastfeeding her child.
18
Hotel management in Washington State should have written policies and procedures as
well as training programs for all front desk personnel that emphasize the hotel’s duty to provide
services and accommodations without unlawful discrimination.
Under Washington law, supervisors and managers of hotels may be sued as individuals
and be individually liable for damages for violation of Washington’s Law Against Discrimination.
A hotel cannot discriminate against guests by charging excessive rates for
accommodations on a discriminatory basis.
RCW 49.60.215 expressly provides that hotel management may refuse to provide
accommodations to an individual whose behavior or actions would constitute a risk to property
or other persons.
A hotel may refuse service or accommodation if:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The person is under the influence of alcohol, is under the influence or in possession of
illegal drugs, or is creating a public nuisance.
The person has previously defrauded the inn or engaged in disruptive or disorderly
behavior.
The person has a contagious disease.
The person is bringing property to the hotel that is dangerous to others or in violation of
the law.
The person is unwilling or unable to pay for hotel services.
The hotel has no accommodations to offer a person.
Noncompliance with reasonable rules.
The person requesting accommodation is exhibiting violent behavior.
The person requesting accommodation refuses to complete a registration form.
Hotels should make sure that the hotel’s policies are part of the contract with the guest by
incorporating an obligation to comply with the policies in the hotel’s electronic and other
methods of confirming reservations and the contract with the guest.
A hotel may refuse to provide accommodations to a minor under the theory that, under
Washington law, a minor has no capacity to enter into a contract for accommodation or services.
It is a prudent practice for hotel management to require the parent’s signature on the hotel
registration card or credit card slip which makes the parent liable for the actions of a minor.
Hotels should consider adoption of policies for prom and graduation parties.
Document in writing the reasons for refusing to provide accommodations to any
individual, and consult experienced counsel when issues and questions arise.
19
Chapter 2: Guest Reservations
2.1.
Form and Effect of Agreement
A hotel and a guest enter into a contract at the time both parties specifically agree to the
hotel’s promise to reserve a room for a definite period of time for a specific price. This contract
may be in oral or written form. A contract is binding when the intention of the parties is plain and
the terms of the contract are agreed upon. Veith v. Xterra Wetsuits, LLC, 144 Wn. App. 362
(2008). Specific contract terms may include the dates of the reservation, the room rate, the
number of rooms, the nature of the accommodation, the number of persons in each room, and
the requirement that the guest accept and comply with the hotel’s policies. Certain reservations
use the guest’s credit card or other form of deposit as security for performance by the guest.
Since a reservation is a contract, the following legal elements must exist:
•
An offer;
•
An acceptance;
•
Consideration; and
•
The capacity of the parties to contract.
Veith, 144 Wn. App. 362, 366.
Generally, the “offer” is the hotel’s publication of the terms on which it will make a room
available to a guest. With most reservations made online, these terms may be published on the
hotel website, in a confirmation email, referenced in a confirmation telephone call or presented
at the front desk. A guest “accepts” the offer by reserving a room and agreeing to use and pay for
the room and, under certain circumstances, agreeing to pay a fee to the hotel if the guest does
not use the room. The “consideration” inherent in establishing a reservation contract generally
consists of the mutual promises of a hotel and its guest; in exchange for the room provided by the
hotel, the guest will provide payment. The capacity of the parties to contract is also important.
Capacity relates to the fact that a hotel may refuse to provide service or accommodations to an
individual under the age of 18 years, under the theory that Washington Law states a minor has no
capacity to enter into a contract. RCW 26.28.015(4).
Currently, many (if not most) hotel reservations are made on-line and confirmed by email.
It is important that the reservation confirmation, or some other clear electronic record, contain
all of the terms of the contract between the hotel and the guest. These terms should include the
obvious—date and room rate—but should also include items such cancellation policies and the
obligation that the guest must comply with the hotel’s rules when at the hotel. Surprisingly,
20
many hotels, as part of the transition to ecommerce, have done away with the signing of any
agreement during registration, but they have not replaced this process with an email or other
process that sets out and confirms the contract between the parties. This problem can create
difficulties if, for example, the hotel wants to remove a guest from the hotel for legitimate
reasons. See, e.g., PART I, Section 3.2, below. See also PART III, Section 10.1(e) for suggested
terms that can be incorporated in the hotel’s website.
Hotel management should review all of its guest contracts and its reservation
processes (including online reservations and emailed confirmations) to insure
that:
•
All rates and prices are clearly specified.
•
The intent and expectations of both the guest and hotel regarding
performance of obligations are clearly set forth.
•
All deadlines are established and listed properly.
•
The hotel is protected in writing against unexpected events.
•
The hotel’s policies respecting guest behavior and misconduct are
referenced, and the guest is obligated to comply with them.
•
In the event of a contract breach or default, the remedies of both the
hotel and guest are clearly set forth.
•
All contracts are legally sufficient, in both form and substance, to avoid
future legal disputes.
21
2.2.
Hotel Remedies
A confirmed reservation generally constitutes a binding agreement (a “reservation
contract”) between the hotel and the guest. If a guest fails to use a reservation, then the hotel is
generally entitled to damages, including: lost rent, incidental damages, and any commercially
reasonable charges, expenses, or commissions incurred after the guest’s breach of contract.
As mentioned above, it is good practice to notify a guest, preferably in writing, of your
hotel’s policy on confirmed reservations and no-shows. Hotel personnel can refer to the written
policy when accepting reservations or applications for rooms. This policy should also be added to
the hotel website and emails confirming guest reservations. A copy of hotel policies should be
made available to guests upon check in. If the reservation and no-show policies are not in
writing, then the hotel should have the policies on a card posted in plain view for employees, and
the card should state that the employees must reiterate the policies orally during check in (this
approach is not recommended because of the obvious difficulty in proving whether the policies
were in fact orally communicated to the guest).
The following is a sample of a simple reservation and cancellation policy:
The hotel will confirm receipt of all reservation requests. Your reservation will be
assured only when you have received written confirmation. Proper billing address
information must be provided. Confirmed reservations are held until 8:00 a.m. the next
day. If a guest does not cancel a confirmed reservation within 24 hours of the check-in
date, then he/she will be billed for a one-night stay.
It is a common practice for hotels to reserve rooms subject to the agreement that, if the
guest does not cancel by a certain date and time and the guest fails to arrive, the guest must pay
for one night’s room charge. Such charges are commonly made to the credit card identified by
the guest who is making the reservation. The terms of the reservation should be clearly spelled
out so that guests understand they will be charged if they do not timely cancel the reservation or
do not show up. This charge is an agreed-upon method of determining the amount of damages
that a hotel will likely incur if the guest fails to honor the reservation contract. Some credit card
companies may have a policy against these automatic charges. It is worthwhile to check the
policies of the credit card companies whose cards you accept to make sure that they will honor
cancelation or no-show charges.
2.3.
Guest Remedies
As indicated above, when a hotel accepts a guest’s reservation, the hotel and the guest
have entered into a contract. Accordingly, the hotel has the contractual obligation to honor the
reservation. If a guest who holds a reservation arrives and the hotel does not have a room
available, then the guest is entitled to have his/her reservations covered elsewhere “without
22
unreasonable delay.” It is in the hotel’s best interest to locate a replacement room for such
guests in an effort to decrease the likelihood of a lawsuit by the guest. Damages that may be
collected by a guest under breach of contract law include actual, incidental, and consequential
damages. Any guest refused admittance after having a confirmed reservation with the hotel is
entitled to the difference in cost of relocating to another hotel, if the room rates are higher, and
may hold the hotel liable for expenses incurred while relocating (cab fare, garage expense, and
the like). Although there is no case law in Washington State on this subject, other jurisdictions
have addressed the issue. See, e.g., Wells v. Holiday Inn, 522 F. Supp. 1023 (W.D. Mo. 1981).
Most other states allow for punitive damages, and courts have imposed them for breach
of a hotel reservation. See Dolo v. Outrigger Hotel, 54 Haw. 18, 501 P. 2d 368 (1972).
Washington is one of a few states that does not allow punitive damages in contract or tort cases.
However, judges and juries can be expected to provide more liberal awards when a party engages
in an egregious or offensive behavior. Hotel managers should exercise all reasonable precautions
to prevent a breach of a reservation contract, and, if a problem occurs, the hotel should assist its
guests to attempt to mitigate their damages. That will help to minimize the risk of substantial
damage awards.
2.4.
Overbooking
Some hotels make a practice of overbooking available space and accommodations. These
hotels operate on the assumption that overbooking ensures stronger sales overall—but it can
invite negative consequences. In some instances, Washington courts have found the practice of
overbooking room reservations to be so extreme as to constitute fraud.
In Rainbow Travel v. Hilton Hotels, 896 F.2d 1233 (10th Cir.1990), a tour operator sued
Hilton Hotels, alleging breach of contract and fraud. The tour group had obtained confirmed
reservations as a part of a football tour promotion. The hotel did not honor the reservation. The
court ruled that the hotel had a regular policy of overbooking and awarded damages to the tour
operator.
An argument can also be made that the practice of overbooking qualifies under
Washington’s Consumer Protection Act as an “unfair or deceptive act or practice in conduct of
any trade of commerce” and is unlawful. In addition to injunctive relief, a civil action brought by
an aggrieved party under the Consumer Protection Act could also include the right to actual and
treble damages, costs, and attorneys fees. See RCW 19.86.090.
2.5.
Catering, Banquet, Meeting and Convention Contracts
Any contract created for the purpose of guaranteeing catering services, banquet, meeting,
or convention facilities, should be reviewed by legal counsel. Washington contract law provides
protection to both buyers and sellers of services for a breach of contract.
23
If a party contracts with a hotel for services or facilities and then breaches the contract,
the hotel is entitled to contract damages. See Hotel Del Coronado Corp. v. Food Service
Equipment Distributors Assoc., 783 F.2d 1323 (9th Cir. 1986). Damages may include the
difference between the contract price and market price at the time of the breach, pluse
incidental damages such as commercially reasonable charges, expenses, or commissions incurred
in stopping delivery or performance. If a party does not fulfill a contract with a hotel, the hotel
must make commercially reasonable efforts to mitigate its damages. This includes making
attempts to rent the banquet or meeting space and finding a use for any specially prepared food.
It is important that the hotel keep detailed records of the efforts to mitigate damages. These
records provide necessary evidence to show mitigation and good faith in court, if the hotel is
forced to initiate a civil suit to recover the loss.
Contract law also protects the party who contracts with the hotel for services or facilities.
If the hotel breaches the contract or fails to provide the contracted services or facilities, then the
party is entitled to damages. Similarly, the party is also required to attempt to make efforts to
mitigate the damages.
2.6.
Gift Certificates and Cards
Many hotels sell gift certificates (including coded gift cards) that can be redeemed at the
hotel by the holder of the certificate. Sometimes, the certificate is purchased, but the holder puts
it in a back drawer and forgets about it. Applicable law used to require the hotel to remit the
revenues from these unredeemed certificates to the State of Washington as unclaimed property.
In 2004, the WLA, with the help of other interested groups, succeed in obtaining passage
of a Washington statute addressing this problem and otherwise regulating gift cards and
certificates. See RCW 19.240. Under the statute, for certificates issued after July 1, 2004:
•
You do not have to report or remit to the State any revenues from unredeemed
certificates.
•
In most cases, you cannot assess any dormancy, inactivity or service fees, and the
certificate cannot have an expiration date.
•
You must give customers the option of receiving a cash refund if the value of the
certificate or the remaining balance is $5 or less.
2.7.
Summaries and Conclusions
Washington’s contract law controls the form and effect of a hotel’s contract with its guest.
24
Hotels should make sure their physical and electronic reservation procedures create a
clear written contract with terms that disclose and include the hotel’s hold-over, conduct, and
other policies.
A hotel and a guest each have rights and remedies in the event the other breaches a
contract for accommodations and services.
The practice of overbooking by a hotel could subject it to a charge of an unfair or
deceptive act or practice in violation of Washington’s Consumer Protection Act.
Catering, banquet and convention contracts are subject to Washington’s contract law.
These agreements should be carefully reviewed by a hotel’s legal counsel.
Gift cards/certificates issued after July 1, 2004, usually can’t have expiration dates, and
you usually can’t assess dormancy or service fees, but you no longer are required to report and
remit revenues when the holder doesn’t redeem them.
25
Chapter 3: The Innkeeper’s Right To Evict A Guest, Tenant, Patron Or Others
3.1.
Distinction Between Guest and Tenant
Washington, like most states, has detailed statutes that govern when and how a tenant
can be evicted. These statutes are found in Washington’s Residential Landlord-Tenant Act, RCW
19.48.010. They require that, before a tenant may be evicted, certain notices must be given and
an action must be commenced in State court. If the Act does not apply to the relationship,
however, then an owner can remove an unwanted person from his property by self-help
measures or with the assistance of the police.
There had been some gray areas in determining whether a hotel guest is a “tenant” under
the Act. See, e.g., Smith v. Dorchester Hotel Co., 145 Wash. 344 (1927). Fortunately, however,
RCW 59.18.040(3) currently states that “residence in a hotel, motel, or other transient lodging” is
exempt from the Washington Residential Landlord-Tenant Act. The amended RCW 19.48.010
now defines a hotel as a facility “in which three or more rooms are used for the accommodation
of such guests . . . “ Accordingly, a person staying at a hotel is not subject to the eviction policies
and procedures under the Act.
Sometimes, a hotel guest can stay at a hotel for several months at a time. Although this
kind of residence at a hotel is probably still exempt from the Act, an expectation of certain rights
might develop, and this can make removal of the guest more difficult. It is advisable to require
extended stay guests to check out and check in at regular intervals. This practice provides a
mechanism to ensure that a continued stay is subject to any changes in policies and rates and
that the stay continues to be understood as a hotel/guest relationship that is governed by the
hotel’s normal guest contract. It also provides a helpful, additional occasion to enforce removal if
a guest has violated policies and overstayed his or her welcome.
3.2.
Eviction Rights in General
As indicated in Chapter 2, a guest’s stay at a hotel is essentially a contract relationship. If,
after a person has been admitted as a guest of the hotel, he or she breaches this contract by
violating hotel policies, failing to pay charges, or overstaying the reserved period of time, then the
hotel may evict the guest.
If, however, it is not clear whether the hotel’s policies are part of the contract, the policies
have been violated, or the guest is otherwise in breach of the contract, then the removal of the
guest will be problematic and can even create liability. Accordingly, as stressed in Chapter 2,
hotels should make sure their physical and electronic reservation procedures create a clear
written contract with terms that disclose and include the hotel’s hold-over, conduct, and other
policies.
26
Any confrontation with a guest can potentially create legal liability for the hotel. As a
result, the hotel should use every effort to remove a guest in a reasonable and respectful manner
and without physical force. Such efforts may include quiet and courteous discussion, clearly
stating what is requested, and providing appropriate assistance. Physical confrontation should be
avoided—if injury results, claims are likely, regardless of who is at fault. If reasonable efforts fail,
it is recommended that the hotel ask local law enforcement to assist.
Hotels should anticipate that these events may occur and prepare for them by training the
hotel personnel and by having appropriate policies and procedures. Because local law
enforcement is the best resource when physical force is needed, hotels should also establish and
maintain close relationships with local law enforcement supervisors. The hotel should engage
with these supervisors in advance of any problem arising and establish the role of law
enforcement when problems occur.
3.3.
Application of Criminal Laws.
RCW 9A.52.070 states:
(1) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the first degree if he knowingly enters
or remains unlawfully in a building.
(2) Criminal trespass in the first degree is a gross misdemeanor.
If a guest fails to leave when he is not entitled to remain at the hotel, then the guest is in
violation of this statute. The police are required to enforce this law and remove the guest. The
law is an important tool and should be part of your discussion with local law enforcement before
any incident actually occurs.
If a guest fails to pay for his/her lodging, the hotel also may have remedies under
RCW 19.48.110. This statute makes it a crime for any person to willfully obtain lodging without
paying, with the intent to defraud the innkeeper. If the aggregate amount owed the innkeeper
exceeds $75.00, the person is guilty of a felony. Further, a guest may not remove his or her
baggage or personal property without the permission of the hotel. Such removal or attempted
removal of the property without paying is prima facie evidence of fraudulent intent.
3.4.
Eviction for Violation of Hotel Policies
A guest may be evicted for violating hotel policies. As indicated above, however, if the
policies are not clearly a part of your contract with the guest, then the hotel should take care to
make sure the hotel’s actions are on sound legal footing.
If a guest is evicted for violating hotel policies, then the hotel must make an effort to
ensure that the policies apply equally to all persons without discrimination. A hotel’s policies may
include rules pertaining to moral conduct, drunkenness, or rules to ensure the peace and
27
reputation of the hotel. As a result, the rules may be susceptible to “judgment calls,” and these
interpretations may open the hotel to claims of discrimination. Thus, proper training of staff is
essential.
3.5.
Eviction for Overstaying
Hotels have the right to evict a guest who has failed to pay the hotel bill when due under
the contract with the guest.
If a guest fails to make payment by the contractually-specified hour, the guest may forfeit
his/her accommodation privileges. A hotel is entitled to exclusive and complete control of the
room including the option to enter the guest’s room and confiscate personal property for
payment (see RCW 60.64.010), refusing to provide accommodation services, changing the locks to
the doors of the room, and renting the room to another guest.
If a guest stays beyond the period stated in his reservation, the guest may be evicted.
As a practical matter, some hotels concerned about the problem of over-staying guests
advise the guests at check-in of the absolute limited duration of their stay based on their
originally booked departure. Some hotels post notices in rooms restating the end of the
registration period. Most hotels send emails to guests confirming reservation details including
arrival and departure dates. For the most part, these repeated notifications seem to overcome
the problem guests who have overstayed their welcome.
3.6.
Eviction Due To Illness
Innkeepers have both a responsibility and a duty to take reasonable care of their guests.
This includes protecting all guests from “avoidable” danger and risk while in the care of the hotel.
Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314A (1965).
In the case of a guest with a contagious disease, the innkeeper (after notifying the guest
and requesting that the guest leave the premises) has the right to move the guest to a hospital or
other medical facility, so long as this action does not endanger the guest’s life. Gingeleskei v.
Westin Hotel Company, 145 F.3d 1337 (9th Cir. 1998). Precautions should be taken, such as
notifying public health officials and/or reporting any mental illness cases to appropriate law
enforcement and/or health officials.
The case of Gingeleskei v. Westin Hotel Company, 145 F.3d 1337 (9th Cir. 1998), illustrates
the duty of care a hotel owes its guests. There, the court reaffirmed the rule set forth in the
Restatement, stating:
§ 314 states that an innkeeper or common carrier must take reasonable steps to
care for a patron, once it is known or there is reason to know of a patron’s illness.
28
Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314A. This includes the duty to take reasonable
steps to “turn the sick man over to a physician.”
The major issue in the case related to whether the hotel followed its written procedures
for the care of a sick man. In this instance, the desk clerk ignored the established procedures and
evidence of this was used against the hotel.
3.7.
Eviction of Persons Other Than Guests
In keeping with the hotel’s responsibility to ensure the privacy and peaceful residence of
its guest(s), a hotel may restrict or remove a person who is not a guest of the hotel. Persons who
are not guests do not have the same rights or privileges as hotel guests. A hotel may take action
to evict visitors of guests who violate a hotel’s rules and/or regulations, or prohibiting solicitors or
persons of questionable intent.
The case of United States v. Rambo, 789 F.2d 1289 (8th Cir. 1986), discusses a hotel’s right
to protect its guests by evicting a naked man who was running through the hallways screaming
and making noise. The court upheld the hotel’s right to evict persons who do not conform to
normal standards of behavior.
How to evict prostitutes has always been a problem for hotel management. If hotel
management can show that a guest, or an alleged prostitute, has offered to perform sexual acts
for a fee, then this will serve as proof that prostitution is occurring at the hotel. Hotel
management should ask the alleged prostitute to leave at the end of the night’s lodging and
make it clear that the room will not be available again to that person. If “customers” are coming
and going to and from the alleged prostitute’s room, then hotel management should threaten to
call local law enforcement. If that does not terminate the activity, local law enforcement should
be called for assistance.
Note: RCW 9A.88.130 provides that a person convicted of patronizing a prostitute
must remain outside the geographical area, prescribed by the court, in which the
person was arrested. RCW 9A.88.140 also allows the police to impound the car of
the prostitute’s patron if that person has been previously convicted.
Hotel management has the right to terminate a guest relationship, or remove other
persons, if the conduct of the guest or other person violates hotel regulations or is offensive to
other guests of the hotel. See Kelly v. United States, 348 A.2d 884 (D.C. 1975)(involving
prostitution) People v. Thorpe, 101 N.Y.S. 2d 986 (1950)(involving two Jehovah’s Witness
Ministers); Larson v. MOA Hospitality, Inc.,…
