Bartenders in nightclubs possess a formal education, have alcohol policies written down, and have an experienced manager at every shift. They can appear as reassuring when they are included in a manual for employees.
But imagine a packed Saturday night, when multiple bartenders serve the same customers, a floor manager is dealing with a disturbance, and customers are ordering rounds from different locations. Who will decide when a person should not be served alcohol?
This could reveal more about a dram shop lawsuit than simply the number of drinks that have been sold.
The first stage in the investigation of overservice is to look at what the staff could see
Dram Shop expert witnesses will investigate whether the alcohol-related decisions made by employees were conforming to the industry standard and conditions.
The presence of alcohol isn’t enough to prove that the bartender was aware of warning signs. The investigation must consider the manner in which the customer behaved, the time of service, and staff observations.
Surveillance footage could reveal difficulties walking, strange movements, or interactions with employees. The testimony of witnesses may add context to the situation even though their recollections may be differing. What’s most important to discern between is what investigators have learned following an incident, and what staff should have known at the moment of the incident.
One tab isn’t always the same as One Drink
These records can be useful however understanding them requires a lot of experience in the hospitality industry. A customer can purchase several rounds of drinks for their friends. A bottle-service transaction may be involving multiple individuals. Separate bartenders may process orders without recognizing that another employee has served the order.
An Alcohol expert witness can examine transaction times, beverage quantities, surveillance recordings, and staffing records to develop a more complete service timeline.
The analysis will reveal instances where employees might have acted or detected intoxication. It could also help identify instances where the evidence isn’t sufficient to determine who consumed particular drinks.
The floor is where the Training takes place.
The certifications of employees are vital but they’re not enough to reveal how a location performed during a particular shift.
Examining whether the training is up to date, if employees understand intervention procedures and if management is able to reinforce the policies can be part of an investigation.
Preston Rideout has over 30 years experience working in the hospitality industry, which includes management of nightclubs and bartending. He also provides beverage program consulting.
Additionally, he holds 112 seller-server certifications, covering 48 states and the District of Columbia, according to his professional qualifications.
The combination of the two lets him examine the education that employees received and their operational decision-making. A bartender, for example might spot the issue, but not know how to contact management or document a denial of services. Insufficient supervision could be just as crucial as the individual employee’s actions.
Insurance investigations may pose similar Questions
Expert witness witnesses for liquor liability frequently deals with the same operational issues for coverage counsel, insurers and defense lawyers. While the terms used could differ, the examination is still centered around alcohol service, employee conduct monitoring, management oversight, and training.
The complete review might include incident reports, written policies, video recordings employee schedules, documents for certification. It is not the job of the expert to endorse the person who retains them. The expert should explain why the data suggests, and identify relevant practices in the field, and acknowledge any limitations.
Experience helps explain the decisions that drive the records
Rideout has served as an alcohol service witness and hospitality cases across 11 states. He has acted with both plaintiff and defense attorneys.
His analysis includes bars, nightclubs and hotels in addition to resorts, casinos and other places where alcohol is served on a regular basis. Every setting is different in terms staffing and issues with supervision.
Bartenders working in a small dining area in a restaurant may be able to observe customers than someone working in a packed nightclub service station. Understanding these differences allows you to put the evidence in its proper context.
Credible opinion doesn’t fill gaps by making assumptions
Dram shop laws differ by jurisdiction. Expert opinions from experts in operations shouldn’t be taken as legal advice. The strongest analyses explain the actions of employees and what service practices are required. They also provide conclusion that can be made from the data.
Sometimes the records reveal an infraction to established procedures. Others records indicate that employees did not follow the proper procedure or left crucial questions unanswered.
For attorneys evaluating alcohol-related claims, that distinction matters. Expert opinions are more than just a report of the event. It helps the court comprehend the decisions that were made in the establishment, before any one knew how the night would conclude.