A nightclub could have trained bartenders as well as written alcohol policies and a skilled manager for each shift. The security measures may appear like a peace of mind when they’re included in an employee’s manual.
Imagine the scene of a Saturday night full of bartenders serving the exact same group of patrons, and the floor manager is dealing with the crowd and customers who are ordering drinks from various locations. Who’s accountable for determining when someone shouldn’t be receiving alcohol at all?
In the case of dram shop litigation the question may be more important than determining how many drinks were sold.
To begin with, staff may be able to spot the signs of an investigation into possible overservice.
Dram Shop expert witnesses examine whether the alcohol-service decisions were in line with the accepted industry standard and the actual conditions that employees had to deal with.
Intoxication alone is not enough to prove that a bartender was aware of warning indicators. The investigation should consider the customer’s behavior, time of service, and the bartender’s observations.
Surveillance footage may reveal difficulty walking, strange movements, or interactions with employees. Witness testimony can provide additional context, though recollections can differ. It is crucial to differentiate between what the investigators were aware of after the incident and what personnel could have reasonably known in the moment.
One Tab Doesn’t Signify One Drink
Records of sales at the point of sale are helpful however, understanding them requires hospitality experience. A customer might purchase several rounds of drinks for their friends. Multiple people may be involved in an order for bottle service. Bartenders may process different orders and not know the prior order placed by another employee.
Alcohol expert witnesses are able to examine the amount of alcohol consumed, the timing of transactions along with surveillance videos and data on staffing to make a better timeline for service.
This investigation could reveal times when employees were able intervene or realize that they were intoxicated. It could also be used to find instances where evidence is not sufficient to determine who drank certain drinks.
Training is only relevant when it Reaches the Floor
While employee certificates are important however, they don’t always accurately reflect the way an establishment was run during a particular shift.
An investigation might examine whether training was in order, whether employees understood intervention procedures and whether management reaffirmed the institution’s rules and regulations.
Preston Rideout has more than 30 years experience working in the hospitality industry, which includes bartending as well as nightclub management. He also offers drink program consultation.
Professionally, his credentials show that he holds 112 seller server certificates covering 48 states, and the District of Columbia.
The combination allows him to analyze the training staff received and the decisions they had to make. Bartenders, for instance may be able to spot a problem but not be able to communicate with management or make a record of a decline of services. Insufficient supervision could be just as crucial as the employee’s individual actions.
Insurance Investigations may ask similar Questions
A Liquor liability expert witness frequently addresses the same operational issues for insurers, coverage counsel, and defense attorneys. The terminology could differ, but the underlying investigation remains focused on alcohol service, staff conduct training, oversight of management.
The comprehensive review may include incident reports, written policies, video recordings employee schedules, certification records. It is not the job of the expert to automatically endorse the company that employs them. The expert must explain what the data supports, identify relevant practices in the field and accept any limitations.
Experience is the reason for the decisions behind the Records
Rideout has served as a witness in alcohol-related service and hospitality matters in eleven states. He has acted with both plaintiff and defense lawyers.
His research examines restaurants, bars, and nightclubs as well as resorts, hotels, casinos and other venues for hospitality which serve alcohol on a regular basis. Each environment presents different structure of staffing and challenges for supervisors.
A bartender in a small dining room in a restaurant could have different opportunities to observe the customers than employees working at a bustling nightclub service station. Understanding the differences will enable you to place evidence in its appropriate operational context.
The credibility of a person’s opinion isn’t filled with assumptions
Dram shop laws are different according to jurisdiction. Expert statements from operational experts cannot be interpreted as a legal determination. The best analysis will explain how the employees acted in the manner that was recognized as a service practice were required, and what conclusions can be based on the evidence.
Sometimes, records indicate that an error was made from the prescribed procedure. Sometimes, the records demonstrate that employees followed appropriate guidelines or left crucial questions unanswered.
In the case of attorneys who evaluate alcohol-related claims, that distinction matters. A professional opinion is more than just a report of the event. It helps the court know what was going on inside the establishment even before the night ended.
