A nightclub could include bartenders with training with written alcohol policy, and a knowledgeable manager on every shift. These safeguards might look reassuring when they are included in an employee manual.
Imagine a Saturday night when several bartenders are serving the same crowd. A floor manager has to handle an issue, and patrons are ordering drinks from several places. Who is responsible for determining if someone shouldn’t be receiving alcohol at all?
This question can reveal more about a dram shop lawsuit other than simply determining how many drinks have been sold.
Overservice investigations begin with what Staff members might see
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-related decisions were consistent with industry standards and the actual circumstances employees encountered.
The fact that a customer may be drunk does not in itself show that a bartender spotted distinct warning signs in the course of service. The investigation should consider the manner in which the customer behaved and the time of service, any observations made by personnel, and any evidence.
Surveillance footage may expose a person’s inability to walk, odd movement, or interaction with employees. Statements from witnesses can provide additional background, however their perceptions may differ. It is crucial to distinguish the information that investigators had after an event and what staff could have reasonably known in the moment.
One Tab Doesn’t Have to Mean One Drink
The points-of-sale records can be helpful, but they need experience in hospitality to interpret. A customer can buy several rounds of beer for their friends. Bottle-service transactions can be performed by more than one person. Bartenders who are separate from each other can take orders without recognizing that a different employee was serving the order.
A Alcohol expert witness will examine transaction times, beverage quantities, surveillance recordings, and staffing records to create a more complete service timeline.
The study could uncover instances where employees were able to intervene or acknowledge that they were drinking. The analysis may also indicate the instances where there isn’t enough evidence to determine the person who consumed an alcohol drink.
The Floor is where the Training takes place.
Certifications of employees are crucial but they’re not a guarantee to reveal how a location worked during a specific shift.
Investigative investigations may determine whether or not the employees are properly trained, if they know the correct intervention procedure, and if managers have reinforced policies.
Preston Rideout has more than 30 years of experience in the hospitality industry, ranging from management of nightclubs and bartending. He also offers drink program consultation.
He also holds 112 seller server certifications that cover 48 states as well as the District of Columbia, according to his professional qualifications.
This combination allows him both to analyze the instruction employees received as well as the operational decisions they had to make. For instance the bartender may be aware of an issue with his behavior, but may not have directions on how to communicate with management or recording a refusal of service. It is therefore important to think about the ability of the supervisor to supervise.
The Insurance Investigation May Ask Similar Questions
A Liquor liability expert witness frequently addresses the same operational issues for insurers, coverage counsel, and defense attorneys. Although the language may vary, the underlying investigation concerns the alcohol service and staff behavior.
A thorough examination could include incident reports, written guidelines recordings of video employee schedules, certification documents, and deposition evidence. It is not up to the expert to automatically approve the entity that they are retained by. It’s about describing the evidence that supports it and to identify industry practices that are relevant and recognize the limitations that are significant.
Experience helps explain the decisions that are behind the records
Rideout has appeared in court on alcohol-related and hospitality cases across eleven states, working as both defense and plaintiff counsel.
His research focuses on bars, nightclubs, restaurants, hotels resorts, casinos, and other hospitality establishments that have alcohol services as part of daily operations. Each place is distinct in terms of staffing requirements and the challenges of supervision.
A bartender working in a tiny restaurant’s dining area may be better able to observe customers more than a staff member working at a counter in a nightclub. Understanding these differences allows you to put the evidence within the correct context of operation.
Credible opinions don’t fill in gaps using assumptions
Dram shop laws vary by region, and operational expert testimony is not to be confused with the legal definition of responsibility. The most accurate analysis will reveal how the employees acted as well as the recognized standards of service that were required, and what conclusions are based on the evidence.
Sometimes, the records reveal that an error is observed from accepted procedure. Sometimes, the records reveal that employees followed proper procedures or left important questions unanswered.
This distinction is crucial for attorneys who are evaluating the validity of claims that involve alcohol. An expert opinion is useful and does more than simply describe the incident. The court will better understand how decisions were made within the institution, even if nobody knew what the outcome would be.