Are these sentences correct:
1-That hotel is out of the city.
2-Mr. Jones is out of the city.
I think that 2 implies that Mr. Jones was in the city and left it. It implies movement out of the city.
In the first sentence, if it is correct, 'out' can't have that implication. (I use 'outside the city' in these cases).
Maybe 1 implies that we have to move out of the city to get that hotel?
I think both sentences are correct, but I would say "That hotel is outside the city" instead of sentence 1.
I don't think sentence 2 implies movement - I would say it indicates a state - at this moment Mr. Jones is not in the city.
Although when someone says that Mr. Jones is out of the city it means probably he was there someday, I wouldn't rule out, by logic, the possibility that the has never been there.
Sentence 1 does not imply one has to move out of the city to get to that hotel, a foreign traveler (outside the city) could reach the hotel before arriving at the city for example.
P.S.: Not a native speaker