Each nightclub needs to have trained bartenders and written alcohol guidelines. They also need an experienced manager for every shift. They can appear as at times as reassuring if they are included in the employee handbook.
Imagine the scene of a Saturday night full of bartenders serving the same number of patrons, while the floor manager manages an issue and customers are ordering drinks at various places. Who is accountable to recognize when someone is no longer eligible to drink alcohol?
This is a more important issue in the dram shop litigation process instead of merely determining the amount of drinks that are sold.
Overservice Investigations Begin With What Staff members might see
Dram Shop expert witnesses examine whether alcohol-service decision were consistent with industry standards and the actual circumstances that employees encountered.
A customer’s eventual intoxication does not in itself show that a bartender spotted visible warning signs throughout service. The investigation should consider the behavior of the customer and the time of service, the observations of staff and evidence available.
Surveillance footage could reveal difficulties walking, unusual movements or even interactions with employees. Witness statements may provide more information, but their recollections may differ. It is crucial to differentiate between what investigators learned about an incident, and what staff members could have reasonably expected to know at the time.
One Tab Doesn’t Necessarily Mean One Drinker
The record of the sale at the point-of-sale can be helpful, but they need experience in hospitality to understand. A customer can buy several rounds of beer for friends. Bottle-service transactions may require more than one person. Separate bartenders may process orders without being aware that another employee was serving the order.
A Alcohol expert witness will examine transaction times, beverage quantities as well as surveillance records and staffing records to create more comprehensive service timelines.
The analysis will reveal instances in which employees might intervened or identified intoxication. It may also identify areas where the evidence is insufficient to establish who consumed certain drinks.
Training is only relevant when it’s on the ground
Employee certifications are important however, they don’t reveal how a location performed during a particular shift.
The investigation of whether the training is up-to-date, whether employees understand intervention procedures and whether managers have a strong understanding of the procedures can form part of the investigation.
Preston Rideout has more than 30 years experience working in the hospitality industry, ranging from management of nightclubs and bartending. He also offers drink program consultation.
According to his professional qualifications, he also holds 112 seller/server certificates that are valid for 48 states and District of Columbia.
This combination allows him both to examine the training employees received as well as the operational decisions that they faced. For example, a bartender might recognize concerning behavior but lack clear directions on how to communicate with management or documenting a refusal of service. It is therefore important to assess the supervisor’s capacity to oversee.
Insurance investigations could pose 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 fundamental investigation still concerns alcohol service, staff behavior, training, and supervision of management.
The comprehensive review may include incident reports as well as written policies, videos schedules for employees, and certification records. It’s not the expert’s job to support a party who wants them. The expert must clarify what the data supports, identify relevant practices in the field and accept any limitations.
Experience explains the reasons that led to the records
Rideout has testified in alcohol-service and hospitality matters in 11 states, and has worked with both plaintiff and defense counsel.
His analysis addresses bars, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels resorts, casinos, and other venues that have alcohol services as part of daily operations. Each setting is unique with regard to staffing and management challenges.
A bartender working in a restaurant’s dining area might have more opportunities to observe clients than an employee at a nightclub service counter. Understanding these differences allows you to put the evidence within the correct context of operation.
It is not possible to fill in gaps by making assumptions
Dram shop laws vary by jurisdiction. Expert evidence from experts in operational matters is not a substitute for a legal decision. The most comprehensive analyses provide a clear explanation of the actions of employees and the service practices that are required. They also confirm the conclusions that can be reasonably drawn from the evidence.
Sometimes, documents show a deviation from the established procedure. Some records reveal that employees didn’t follow the proper procedures or left crucial questions unanswered.
This distinction is crucial for lawyers who are evaluating cases involving alcohol. A professional’s advice that is helpful does more than simply describe the event. It allows the court to be aware of what was happening in the establishment prior to the evening was over.