| One of the  Shabbos laws that seems to present a          problem for a traveler who is a guest in a hotel is the following:           The  Shulchan          Aruch Orach Chaim 366, 1          writes that if there is a common courtyard surrounded by separate          dwellings, even if this area has proper fencing or  mechitzos, it is          forbidden to carry any item from the yard to a house or vice versa.           Carrying in the yard itself if permissible.           In order to carry into a house the dwellers must make an  eruv, i.e. collect          flour etc. from the dwellers and have it baked on behalf of all, then          this is considered as a communal domain allowing one to then carry from          the yard to the respective house and vice versa.   Could this apply in          an apartment house or condominium where the common area is the corridor          or lobby?  What about a          guest in a hotel?  May he          carry from the corridor to his room or vice versa?   Rav          Moshe Feinstein, (Igros Moshe Orach Chaim  I, 141) rules as follows in regard to any dwelling          such as an apartment house or a hotel.  If it is a rental or          leasing arrangement where the lessor (or landlord) owns certain          appliances in the lessee’s (or renter’s) domain,  then the          above requirement of an  eruv does not apply.           He bases this decision on the many Talmudic and rabbinic sources          that ruled that “tfisas yad”          ownership of certain articles, appliances etc. are to be considered as          all part of the lessor's  domain. This is true even though the          renter has rented the apartment as his own private area.           Consequently this would be relevant to the hotel guest who has          rented a room or suite, due to the fact that the hotel management          owns many items in the rooms.    Others          who concurred with this principle were Rav Yaacov Orenstein, O.B.M. (Yeshuos          Yaacov) in the 19th cent. and Rav          Yaacov Breisch, O.B.M., (Chelkas          Yaacov I, 207) in the past          century. Although they arrived at          their ruling in a different manner, nevertheless, they agreed on the          outcome of not requiring an  eruv  in the above          circumstances. |