A nightclub may be equipped with bartenders who are trained, written alcohol policies, as well as a skilled manager for each shift. These security measures could be comforting when they are incorporated in a manual for employees.
Imagine the night of a Saturday that’s crowded, with several bartenders serving the same number of customers, while the floor manager manages a disturbance and customers ordering drinks at various places. Who will decide the moment when a person is no longer allowed to drink alcohol?
In the case of dram shop litigation that question can be more informative than the number of drinks sold.
The first stage in the investigation of overservice is to see what staff members might be seeing.
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-service decisions were consistent with the accepted industry norms and the circumstances employees actually confronted.
It isn’t enough to show that the bartender was aware of warning signs. The investigation needs to consider the customer’s behavior, the timing of service, observations by staff and any evidence that is available.
Surveillance footage may expose a person’s inability to walk, unusual movements, or interactions with employees. Witness testimony can provide additional detail, even though their memories may differ. There is a significant distinction between what the investigators learn following an incident, and what the staff could reasonably have recognized at the time.
One Tab Doesn’t Signify One Drink
The points-of-sale records are helpful, but they require a background in hospitality to read. A customer could buy several rounds of beer to share with friends. There could be multiple people involved in a bottle-service transaction. Bartenders can process separate orders without knowing about the previous order of an employee.
An Alcohol expert witness can examine transaction times, beverage quantities, surveillance recordings, and staffing records to develop a more complete service timeline.
The study could uncover instances where employees were able to intervene or acknowledge that they were drinking. It may also identify areas where the evidence is not sufficient to establish who drank particular drinks.
The importance of training is until it reaches the floor
The accreditation of employees is crucial, but it does not immediately determine the way a facility worked during a specific shift.
Investigative investigations may determine whether or not the employees are properly trained, if they understand the intervention procedures and whether managers have enhanced policies.
Preston Rideout has over 30 years experience working in the hospitality sector, including bartending as well as nightclub management. He also provides beverage program consulting.
Professionally, his credentials show that he is the owner of 112 seller-server certifications covering 48 states in addition to the District of Columbia.
This allows him to review the training his employees received as well as the operational decisions they made. Bartenders, for example, might be able to identify a behavior that is alarming, but they may not be given clear guidelines on how to report it or contact management. In the end, the level of supervision is equally important as the employee’s behavior.
The Insurance Investigation May Ask Similar Questions
Expert witness witnesses for liquor liability typically is able to address the same operational concerns for insurers, coverage counsel defense lawyers, and coverage counsel. The terminology might differ but the primary inquiry still involves alcohol service, staff conduct training, as well as supervision by management.
The complete review might include incident reports as well as written policies, videos, employee schedules and certificates. It is not up to the expert to endorse the party that retains them. The expert has to explain why the evidence supports, identify relevant practices in the field, and acknowledge any limitations.
Experience explains the reasoning that are behind the Records
Rideout has worked with plaintiffs and defendants across 11 states, to give testimony on hospitality, liquor-service and other issues.
The analysis he provides covers bars, restaurants and nightclubs, as well as casinos, resorts, hotels and other settings for hospitality that serve alcohol on a daily basis. Each place has different staffing structures and supervisory challenges.
A bartender in a smaller dining area of the restaurant might have different opportunities to observe patrons than a nightclub worker working at a bustling service station. Understanding these differences can help place the evidence in its proper context.
Reliable opinions won’t fill holes with assumptions
The laws for a dram shop differ in each jurisdiction. Expert testimony from an operational expert is not the same as a legal decision. The best analysis will explain the activities of the employees as well as the recognized standards of service that were necessary, and what conclusions are reasonable on the basis of the evidence.
Sometimes, records show that a deviation was made from the established procedure. Other records show that employees didn’t follow the correct procedures or left critical questions unanswered.
It is vital to differentiate between the two for lawyers in evaluating claims involving alcohol. An expert’s opinion is more than a description of the event. The court is able to understand the decisions made in the institution, even if nobody knew what the outcome would be.