A nightclub could have bartenders trained and certified as well as written alcohol policies and a knowledgeable manager on each shift. In the employee handbook, these safeguards can look comforting.
But imagine a crowded Saturday night where several bartenders serve the same crowd, a floor manager is handling a disturbance, and customers are ordering rounds at different places. Who will decide that a person shouldn’t drink alcohol?
In the context of litigation involving dram shops, this issue can be more insightful than determining how many drinks were sold.
The first step in an investigation of overservice is to look at what the staff could see
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-service decisions were consistent with recognized industry practices and the circumstances employees actually encountered.
A customer’s eventual intoxication does alone prove that a bartender was aware of obvious warning signs while serving. The investigation must consider the behavior of the customer, the time of service, and the observations of staff.
Surveillance video can uncover a lack of ability to walk, odd movements, or interaction with employees. The testimony of witnesses can provide context to the incident, even if recollections are differing. It is crucial to distinguish between what the investigators were aware of about an incident, and what staff could reasonably have known at the time.
One Tab Doesn’t mean one drinker
In order to interpret reports from the point of sale, you need experience in hospitality. A customer can buy several glasses of beer for friends. Bottle-service transactions may involve more than one person. Bartenders who are separate from each other can take orders without knowing that another employee was serving the order.
A Alcohol expert witness will examine the time of transactions, beverages consumed as well as surveillance records and the staffing record to determine a more complete service timeline.
The analysis could reveal moments that employees had the opportunity to detect intoxication and intervene. It can also reveal where the evidence isn’t sufficient to establish who drank particular beverages.
It is important to train only when it’s on the ground
The certification of employees is important however it doesn’t automatically determine how a venue worked during a specific shift.
An investigation could examine whether training was in order, whether employees knew the correct procedures for intervention and whether supervisors reinforced the company’s policies.
Preston Rideout has more than 30 years experience working in the hospitality sector, including bartending and nightclub management. He also provides beverage program consulting.
He also holds 112 seller server certifications that cover 48 states as well as the District of Columbia, according to his professional credentials.
This allows him to review the training his employees received and the operational choices they faced. Bartenders for instance, might be able to spot a pattern that is troubling, but not have clear directions regarding how to report the incident or reach management. In the end, the degree of supervision is just as important as an employee’s behavior.
The Insurance Investigation May Ask Similar Questions
Expert witnesses in Liquor Liability often answer the same operational issues for insurance companies as well as defense counsel and coverage attorneys. While the terms used could differ, the examination is still focused on the alcohol service, employee behavior control, management oversight, as well as training.
The detailed review could comprise incident reports as well as written policies, videos schedules for employees, and certificates. It’s not the role of an expert to automatically appoint the company that employs them. The expert’s responsibility is to present the findings as well as identify the practices of the industry and recognize meaningful limitations.
The Experience of the past explains the reasoning behind the Records
Rideout has worked with plaintiffs and defendants across 11 states in the past to testify on alcohol-service, hospitality and other issues.
His analysis examines restaurants, bars, and nightclubs, in addition to resorts, hotels, casinos and other venues for hospitality that serve alcohol on daily basis. Every setting is different in terms of staffing requirements and management challenges.
A bartender working in a tiny restaurant dining room may be able to observe patrons than employees at a busy nightclub’s service station. Understanding those differences helps place the evidence into its proper operational context.
Credible opinion doesn’t fill gaps by making assumptions
Dram shop laws vary by location, and the operational expert testimony cannot be confused with the legality of determining liability. The most thorough analysis should explain the activities of the employees as well as the recognized standards of service that were necessary, and what conclusions are based on the evidence.
Sometimes the records reveal some deviation from the established procedure. They may also indicate that the employee was following proper methods or did not respond to important questions.
This distinction is crucial for lawyers who are evaluating claims involving alcohol. An expert opinion is useful and does more than just describe the event. It helps the court understand the decision-making process inside the establishment before anyone knew what would happen next.