A nightclub can include bartenders with training with written alcohol policy, and a skilled manager at every shift. A handbook for employees contains these security measures can be seen as reassuring.
But imagine a packed Saturday night when several bartenders are serving the same patrons, a floor manager is managing a disturbance, and customers are ordering drinks at different places. Who has the responsibility to determine when a person is no longer eligible to drink alcohol?
In the context of litigation involving dram shops, this issue can be more informative than knowing how many bottles were sold.
The first step in a probe into overservice is to determine what the staff could see
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-related choices were consistent with recognized industry practices and the specific circumstances employees faced.
A customer’s intoxication cannot prove on its own that the bartender noticed warning signs while serving. Investigations must take into account what the customer’s behavior was, the timing of the service, the observation of staff, as well as any other evidence.
Surveillance footage could reveal difficulties walking, strange movements, or even interactions with employees. Witnesses’ testimony can give context to the event even though their recollections may be different. The important distinction is between what investigators know after an incident and what the personnel would reasonably recognize at the time.
One tab isn’t always the same as One Drinker
The interpretation of reports from point-of-sale requires a lot of knowledge of hospitality. A patron could purchase multiple rounds of beer for friends. Bottle-service transactions could involve more than one person. Different bartenders could process orders without recognizing that a different employee is serving the order.
Alcohol experts are able to analyze quantity of drinks consumed and transaction times along with surveillance videos and information on staffing in order to develop a better service timeline.
This investigation could reveal times when employees were able intervene or recognize the signs of intoxication. It can also be used to pinpoint situations where evidence is not enough to determine who drank certain drinks.
Training is Important Only Once It Gets to the Floor
While employee certificates are important, they do not always reflect how an establishment operated during a certain shift.
A thorough investigation can determine if training was in order, whether employees were aware of the procedures to intervene and whether supervisors reinforced the establishment’s policies.
Preston Rideout brings approximately three decades of hospitality operations experience to this work, including bartending, nightclub management, and beverage-program consulting.
He also holds 112 seller-server certifications, covering 48 states and the District of Columbia, according to his professional certifications.
That combination allows him to look at the training that employees received as well as the operational decisions they had to make. Bartenders, for example may be able to spot an issue but do don’t know how to reach management or report a denial of services. It is crucial to assess the supervisor’s capacity to supervise.
Insurance investigations may pose similar Questions
A Liquor liability expert witness frequently deals with the same operational issues for insurers, coverage counsel, and defense attorneys. While the terms used could differ, the examination remains focused on alcohol services, employee conduct, management oversight, and training.
An in-depth review can include incident reports and written policies. This could also include video recordings, employee schedules or certificates. It is not the job of the expert to endorse the person who retains them. It’s about describing the reasons for their findings and identify the relevant practices in the industry, and acknowledge meaningful limitations.
Experience can help explain the reasoning that are behind the records
Rideout has served as a witness in alcohol service and hospitality matters in 11 states. He has acted on behalf of both plaintiffs and defense attorneys.
His analysis is a comprehensive look at restaurants, bars, and nightclubs along with casinos, resorts, hotels and other settings for hospitality that serve alcohol on a regular basis. Each place has different staffing structures and supervisory challenges.
A bartender in a smaller dining area of an eatery may be able to see different aspects of the customers than a nightclub employee who works at a busy service station. Knowing these differences will help put the evidence into its proper context.
Reliable opinions won’t fill the gaps by relying on assumptions
Dram shop laws vary by region, and operational expert testimony is not to be confused with the legal definition of responsibility. The most thorough analyses describe what employees did and what service practices are needed. They also confirm the conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence.
Sometimes, records indicate an infraction to established procedures. In other instances, they reveal that employees followed proper methods or left critical questions unanswered.
For attorneys evaluating alcohol-related claims it is important to distinguish between the two. A reliable expert opinion can do more than simply describe the incident. It helps the court understand the decision-making process inside the restaurant before anyone knew how the night would end.