Nightclubs can have bartenders trained and certified and alcohol policies written down and a knowledgeable manager at every shift. They may be described as reassuring in a manual for employees.
Imagine a busy Saturday night, where multiple bartenders are serving the same group while a floor supervisor is dealing with a disturbance, and customers are ordering drinks from different locations. Who is accountable to recognize when someone is no longer eligible for alcohol?
This aspect is more crucial in the context of dram shops litigation, rather than simply determining the quantity of drinks being sold.
The first step in an investigation of overservice is to find out what staff members might be seeing.
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-service decisions were consistent with recognized industry practices and the circumstances employees actually encountered.
An eventual drunkenness of a client does not, by itself, establish that a bartender observed visible warning signs throughout service. The investigation should take into account the manner in which the customer behaved, the time of service, and the bartender’s observations.
Surveillance video footage could reveal problems walking, strange movements, or even interactions with employees. Witness statements may provide more information, but their recollections may differ. It is crucial to differentiate the information that investigators had about an incident, and what staff members could have reasonably known in the moment.
One Tab Doesn’t Equal One Drink
The point-of-sale record is useful however, understanding them require experience with hospitality. A single customer might purchase many rounds of drinks for friends. Bottle-service transactions can involve more than one person. Separate bartenders might take orders and not know what an employee has previously done.
Alcohol expert witnesses can review transaction times, drink quantities, surveillance video, and the records of staffing in order to develop a comprehensive timeline.
The analysis could reveal instances where employees were able to intervene or acknowledge that they were drinking. It can also identify the instances where there isn’t enough evidence to pinpoint the person who drank the particular drink.
Training Matters Only When It is completed on the floor.
The certification of employees is vital however it doesn’t instantly determine how a location worked during a specific shift.
An investigation might examine whether training was on-point, whether employees knew the correct procedures for intervention and whether management reaffirmed the policies of the establishment.
Preston Rideout has more than 30 years experience working in the hospitality sector, including bartending and nightclub management. He also offers drink program consultation.
Professionally, his qualifications show that he is the owner of 112 seller-server certificates for 48 states as well as the District of Columbia.
The combination of the two allows him to look at both the training that employees received and their operational decisions. Bartenders, for example may be able to spot the issue, but not be able to communicate with management or record a refusal of service. It is crucial to assess the supervisor’s capacity to supervise.
The Insurance Investigation May Ask Similar Questions
A Liquor liability specialist witness frequently is able to address the same operational issues for insurers and coverage counsel as well as defense attorneys. Though the language might differ however, the fundamental issue that is being investigated concerns the conduct of staff and alcohol service.
A thorough review may include incident reports, written policy documents and procedures, videos and employee schedules. It could also include certification records, and deposition witness testimony. It’s not the expert’s job to support those who want them. The expert should explain why the data supports, identify relevant practices in the industry and accept any limitations.
The experience of the past helps explain the rationale behind the documents
Rideout has worked with plaintiffs as well as defendants in 11 states in the past to testify on hospitality, liquor-service and other aspects.
His analysis addresses bars, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels, resorts, casinos, and other hospitality settings that have alcohol services as part of the day-to-day operations. Each setting has its own unique structure of staffing and challenges for supervisors.
Bartenders working in a small restaurant dining room may have different opportunities to observe the customers than employees at a busy nightclub service station. Understanding those differences helps place the evidence within its proper context.
A Credible Opinion Doesn’t Fill the gaps by assuming assumptions.
The laws for a dram shop differ in every jurisdiction. Operational expert testimony is not the same as a legal determination. The most robust analyses clarify the actions of employees and what service practices are required. They also provide conclusions that are able to be made from the data.
Sometimes, the records show deviations from established procedures. In other instances, they demonstrate that employees followed appropriate practices or leave important questions unanswered.
For attorneys evaluating alcohol-related claims, that distinction matters. A professional opinion is more than a summary of the incident. It helps the court understand what was happening inside the establishment even before the evening was over.