A nightclub could include bartenders with training, written alcohol policies, and a skilled manager at every shift. The security measures may appear reassuring when they are included in an employee manual.
Imagine a jam-packed Saturday night where several bartenders serve the same crowd while a floor supervisor is handling a disturbance, and customers are ordering rounds from various locations. Who is responsible for recognizing when a person should not receive alcohol?
In the context of litigation involving dram shops, this question could be more revealing than simply knowing how many bottles were sold.
Overservice investigations begin with what Staff could be seeing
Dram Shop expert witnesses will investigate whether the alcohol-related choices made by employees were in line with industry standards and conditions.
A customer’s intoxication does not establish, on its own that the bartender noticed warning signs while serving. The investigation must consider the behavior of the customer, the timing of service and employees’ observations.
Surveillance video can reveal an inability to walk, strange actions, or even interactions with employees. Witness testimony can provide further details, though their memories may differ. It is crucial to distinguish between what investigators knew after an event and what the staff could have reasonably known at the time.
One Tab Doesn’t Always Mean One Drink
Understanding the reports at point of sale requires years of prior experience in hospitality. A single customer might purchase multiple rounds of wine for friends. Bottle-service transactions can involve more than one person. Bartenders can process separate orders without knowing the previous order of a different employee.
An Alcohol expert witness can examine transaction times, beverage quantities, surveillance recordings, and staffing records to develop a more complete service timeline.
The analysis can identify instances where employees may have intervened, or recognized that they were intoxicated. It also can reveal instances when there is no evidence to establish who consumed certain drinks.
Training is Important Only Once It Reaches the Floor
Certifications of employees are crucial, but they don’t automatically establish how a venue performed during a particular shift.
Checking if the training program is current, if employees are aware of the intervention procedure and if management is able to reinforce the policies could be part of an investigation.
Preston Rideout has over 30 years experience working in the hospitality industry, including bartending as well as nightclub management. He also provides advice on beverage programs.
The professional credentials of his work also indicate that he holds 112 seller server certifications covering 48 states in addition to the District of Columbia.
This allows him to examine the training employees received, as well as the operational decisions that they faced. For instance Bartenders may recognize concerning behavior but lack clear directions on how to communicate with management or documenting a refusal of service. Therefore, the degree of supervision is equally important as the employee’s actions.
Insurance Investigations may ask similar Questions
A specialist witness for liquor liability typically deals with the same operational issues for insurers and coverage counsel as well as defense lawyers. The terminology may differ, but the underlying investigation still concerns alcohol service, staff conduct training, as well as supervision of management.
A thorough review could include incidents reports as well as written policies. It may also include video recordings as well as employee schedules and certification documents. The responsibility of the expert is not to automatically support the party in the process of retaining the expert. It’s to describe the reasons for their findings and identify the relevant practices in the industry and recognize the limitations that are significant.
Experience Helps Explain the Decisions that are behind the Records
Rideout has served as a witness in alcohol-related service and hospitality cases in 11 states. He has acted with both plaintiff and defense attorneys.
His analysis examines restaurants, bars, and nightclubs, in addition to casinos, resorts, hotels as well as other establishments that serve alcohol on regular basis. Each setting has its own unique organizational structures and supervisory issues.
A bartender in a smaller dining room at a restaurant may have different opportunities to observe customers than a nightclub employee who works at a busy service station. Understanding these differences allows you to understand the data into its correct operational context.
It is not possible to fill in gaps by making assumptions
The laws for a dram shop differ in every jurisdiction. Expert testimony from an operational expert is not the same as a legal decision. The best analysis will explain the actions of employees, which recognized service practices were required, and what conclusions can be based on the evidence.
Sometimes, records indicate some deviation from the established procedure. They may also indicate that an employee adhered to the proper methods or did not respond to important questions.
It is crucial to differentiate between the two for lawyers in evaluating claims involving alcohol. A professional opinion is more than a narrative of the incident. It assists the court to understand the decisions being made inside the establishment, before any one knew what would happen next.