OCR Text |
Show Tha supremo court at Horlln haB rea-dered rea-dered a decision limiting dnmnge nlaltni by hotelkeepors whiert wilt be of Jn teres lo tourists gsnorally and the many Amir leans who stay at Oerninn hotels ! fcirtleulnr The decision Is the sublet of a retort to tha state department if Consul risneral tiuenthor at Krnnkfort. The question Involved was whether ft how4keoL-T is entitled to .bimages fro Iho heirs a guest, who. aft-r a itay sf aevoral days at the hotel, dies there f hanrt failure, nnd whose death necessitated necessi-tated a renovation and ronseiueutly ft temporary non-rental uf tho room ha haft occupied. The hotel kaper claimed pay for th expenaee of renovation and dial nf eft in of tha room nnd the lose of rental or ths anme for ten dy As Hie hole! wna .nt of the rVral cbN, the sum aak.-.l wii conn), ten. hie Tho supreme curt dli-missed dli-missed the suit on tbo ground tint "IW tonnnt of a room is only responsible fif dumiigee if thev w.re canned bv hl own fault or that of bla people The d'ftt of his hotel gueat la a risk Involve 1 IB keeping a hotel which ths hotelkesp' alone haa to hoar, and which hs cannot trnnsfer to (he heirs of the de e(1ied The case, of couth. w..uM be differ sal H the guest had ended hm life by nub clde or had conconled fi.uu the hotrl keeper a aevero ailtnr'it which res'iMM In death " |