and specifically the suppliers of transportation services. GET also argues that tour operators are also not dence of a warranty did not appear in the brochure for Ramage’s 1995 tour; it appeared only in the 1996 brochure. GET contends that as a matter of law the “Responsibility” disclaimer explicitly states that it was not guaranteeing the safety of tour participants while they were in the hands of third-party tour operators. Fourth, GET argues that as a matter of law it was not negligent in selecting a ground operator for the tour. The scope of the duty of tour operators in selecting independent operators is broad and only compels a general inquiry by the tour operator into the safety of the independent operator. Wilson v. American Trans Air, Inc., 874 F.2d 386 (7th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). In the instant ease, GET had no reason to
holding that a tour operator had no duty to make specific inquiries into guest safety or security at the hotel where it already completed a general inspection and relied on the hotels good reputation recognizing duty of innkeeper to guest holding that a hotel security guard was not liable under  1983 merely because he called police and brought the police to the plaintiffs hotel room holding that search of hotel room without a search warrant and without consent of absent guest was unlawful even though hotel clerk had consented to search holding that a hotel guest has a legitimate expectation of privacy in his room during the period of time for which the room is rented