oama@lists.imla.org

Oklahoma Association of Municipal Attorneys

View all threads

Hotel / Motel Eviction process

JB
Jeff Bryant
Mon, Jun 24, 2024 5:00 PM

I had a member city attorney pose this question:

Has any city run into a request to evict someone from a Hotel or Motel under the change last year in Title 15 of the Oklahoma Statutes, Section 508 (B). This process allows using law enforcement to remove an occupant of a hotel or motel as a trespasser.  Here there are peculiar facts that the person to be removed was/is a long-term occupant of the room (1.5 years), and previously had an employment relationship with the motel that has not ended.

Has anyone research this to determined either:

  1. Whether the statute would apply for a long term occupant; or
       2.    Since this was long term occupancy, that the unit was converted to a dwelling unit and eviction should occur under the Landlord/Tenant Act.

Thank you for your feedback. .

Jeff H Bryant
Director of Legal Services
Associate General Counsel
jbryant@omag.orgmailto:jbryant@omag.org

[OMAG Small Logo Smooth]
3650 S. Boulevard
Edmond, Oklahoma  73013
Phone: 405-657-1419
Fax: 405-657-1401
Cell: 405-830-8672
www.omag.orghttp://www.omag.org/

I had a member city attorney pose this question: Has any city run into a request to evict someone from a Hotel or Motel under the change last year in Title 15 of the Oklahoma Statutes, Section 508 (B). This process allows using law enforcement to remove an occupant of a hotel or motel as a trespasser. Here there are peculiar facts that the person to be removed was/is a long-term occupant of the room (1.5 years), and previously had an employment relationship with the motel that has not ended. Has anyone research this to determined either: 1. Whether the statute would apply for a long term occupant; or    2. Since this was long term occupancy, that the unit was converted to a dwelling unit and eviction should occur under the Landlord/Tenant Act. Thank you for your feedback. . Jeff H Bryant Director of Legal Services Associate General Counsel jbryant@omag.org<mailto:jbryant@omag.org> [OMAG Small Logo Smooth] 3650 S. Boulevard Edmond, Oklahoma 73013 Phone: 405-657-1419 Fax: 405-657-1401 Cell: 405-830-8672 www.omag.org<http://www.omag.org/>
ML
Matt Love
Mon, Jun 24, 2024 8:40 PM

I think there'd need to be a lot more facts flushed out before that
question could be answered. The tension is between the Innkeeper Rights Act
and the Landlord Tenant Act, both of which contain references to transient
occupancy in key sections. See 15 O.S. 505(2)(g) and 41 O.S. 104(4).
There's a great discussion in Buck v. Del City Apartments, Inc., 1967 OK
81, P.7, 431 P.2d 360, about the distinction between a tenant and a
innkeepers guest being the element of possession. "A tenant is deemed to
have exclusive legal possession of the demised premises and stands
responsible for their care and condition. A guest, on the other hand, has
merely a right to the use of the premises while the innkeeper retains his
control over them, is responsible for the necessary care and attention and
retains the right of access for such purpose. Modern law tends to regard as
a guest anyone who is a patron of the inn as such, and receives the same
treatment as that accorded to short-term guests."

For those who were fans of Boston Legal, you might recall Alan Shore living
at a hotel for a prolonged period. Was he a tenant or a guest? The hotel
continued to clean and take care of his room - he didn't obtain
exclusive legal
possession of the room for the defined time period. He was probably still a
guest at the hotel notwithstanding the prolonged stay. If the person in
question was an employee of the hotel, then I'd be concerned that the facts
might show that he had exclusive possession. Did housekeeping clean his
room every day, or did he clean it? Did housekeeping change the sheets
every so often, or did he turn in the soiled linens and get a new set that
he brought back to the room? My fear would be that the facts may give the
appearance that this now-former employee's stay at the hotel bore no
resemblance to the experience of the rest of the customers but looked
strikingly similar to a standard landlord tenant relationship.

Matt

On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 12:00 PM Jeff Bryant via Oama oama@lists.imla.org
wrote:

I had a member city attorney pose this question:

Has any city run into a request to evict someone from a Hotel or Motel
under the change last year in Title 15 of the Oklahoma Statutes, Section
508 (B). This process allows using law enforcement to remove an occupant
of a hotel or motel as a trespasser.  Here there are peculiar facts that
the person to be removed was/is a long-term occupant of the room (1.5
years), and previously had an employment relationship with the motel that
has not ended.

Has anyone research this to determined either:

1. Whether the statute would apply for a long term occupant; or
  1. Since this was long term occupancy, that the unit was converted to a
    dwelling unit and eviction should occur under the Landlord/Tenant Act.

Thank you for your feedback. .

Jeff H Bryant Director of Legal Services
Associate General Counsel

jbryant@omag.org jbryant@omag.org

[image: OMAG Small Logo Smooth]
3650 S. Boulevard
Edmond, Oklahoma  73013
Phone: 405-657-1419
Fax: 405-657-1401

Cell: 405-830-8672
www.omag.org

--
Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org
To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org

I think there'd need to be a lot more facts flushed out before that question could be answered. The tension is between the Innkeeper Rights Act and the Landlord Tenant Act, both of which contain references to transient occupancy in key sections. See 15 O.S. 505(2)(g) and 41 O.S. 104(4). There's a great discussion in *Buck v. Del City Apartments, Inc.*, 1967 OK 81, P.7, 431 P.2d 360, about the distinction between a tenant and a innkeepers guest being the element of possession. "A tenant is deemed to have exclusive legal possession of the demised premises and stands responsible for their care and condition. A guest, on the other hand, has merely a right to the use of the premises while the innkeeper retains his control over them, is responsible for the necessary care and attention and retains the right of access for such purpose. Modern law tends to regard as a guest anyone who is a patron of the inn as such, and receives the same treatment as that accorded to short-term guests." For those who were fans of Boston Legal, you might recall Alan Shore living at a hotel for a prolonged period. Was he a tenant or a guest? The hotel continued to clean and take care of his room - he didn't obtain *exclusive* legal possession of the room for the defined time period. He was probably still a guest at the hotel notwithstanding the prolonged stay. If the person in question was an employee of the hotel, then I'd be concerned that the facts might show that he had exclusive possession. Did housekeeping clean his room every day, or did he clean it? Did housekeeping change the sheets every so often, or did he turn in the soiled linens and get a new set that he brought back to the room? My fear would be that the facts may give the appearance that this now-former employee's stay at the hotel bore no resemblance to the experience of the rest of the customers but looked strikingly similar to a standard landlord tenant relationship. Matt On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 12:00 PM Jeff Bryant via Oama <oama@lists.imla.org> wrote: > I had a member city attorney pose this question: > > > > Has any city run into a request to evict someone from a Hotel or Motel > under the change last year in Title 15 of the Oklahoma Statutes, Section > 508 (B). This process allows using law enforcement to remove an occupant > of a hotel or motel as a trespasser. Here there are peculiar facts that > the person to be removed was/is a long-term occupant of the room (1.5 > years), and previously had an employment relationship with the motel that > has not ended. > > > > Has anyone research this to determined either: > > > > 1. Whether the statute would apply for a long term occupant; or > > 2. Since this was long term occupancy, that the unit was converted to a > dwelling unit and eviction should occur under the Landlord/Tenant Act. > > > > Thank you for your feedback. . > > > > > > > *Jeff H Bryant Director of Legal Services* > Associate General Counsel > > *jbryant@omag.org <jbryant@omag.org>* > > [image: OMAG Small Logo Smooth] > 3650 S. Boulevard > Edmond, Oklahoma 73013 > Phone: 405-657-1419 > Fax: 405-657-1401 > > Cell: 405-830-8672 > www.omag.org > > > -- > Oama mailing list -- oama@lists.imla.org > To unsubscribe send an email to oama-leave@lists.imla.org >