[glimmertwin]

[ QUOTE ]
No one has mentioned it yet, but Nevada Revised Statute 651.010 limits the liability of hotel owner for guest property stolen from a guestroom where a safe or vault is available. In that instance, in order to recover you would have to establish that the hotel is not just negligent but grossly negligent. That standard is tough to overcome.

[/ QUOTE ]

From that New York Times article somebody referred to:

[ QUOTE ]
The matter of limiting innkeepers' liability goes far back in law. A cap on what an innkeeper must pay if travelers lose their belongings came about to protect those who provided shelter to people on the road -- a desirable situation in the view of public policy -- from being put out of business by visitors who sued after being robbed on the premises.

In the United States, every state and territory has a law limiting this liability, and each state requires that notices of this be posted in a particular way. No Federal law is involved.

Many of these limits were set in the last century, and inflation has made them out of date. In the last five years, some legislatures have been pushed by consumers into raising the limits.

John Hyland, a lawyer at Sherry & O'Neill in New York, which specializes in hotel law, gave some figures for the limits in states popular with tourists: New Jersey, $5,000; New York, $1,500; Florida, $1,000; California, $1,000; Nevada, $750, and Illinois, $500.


[/ QUOTE ]

Presumably, the Rio had their warnings mounted in two places -- on the safe, and on the back of the door. That way, even if one gets damaged or removed, there's always a back-up version. I would have thought this would be precisely to avoid claims of negligence on their part.

Also, if you *were* running an insurance scam, surely the first thing you'd do would be to peel the sticker off the safe that warns you against leaving large sums inside?