Nightclubs may employ bartenders who are trained, have alcohol policies written down, and have an experienced manager at every shift. They can appear as comforting when they are incorporated in the employee handbook.
Imagine a busy Saturday night, where multiple bartenders are serving the same group while a floor supervisor is managing a disturbance, and customers are ordering drinks from various locations. Who will decide that a person shouldn’t drink alcohol?
In the case of dram shop litigation this question could be more revealing than simply finding out how many drinks were sold.
Overservice Investigations Begin By What Staff Could See
Dram Shop expert witnesses will determine if the alcohol service decision-making of employees was conforming to industry standards and circumstances.
The presence of alcohol isn’t enough to show that the bartender knew of the warning indicators. The investigation should consider what the customer’s behavior was as well as the timing of the service, the observation of staff, and any available evidence.
Surveillance footage may expose a person’s inability to walk, unusual actions, or even interactions with employees. Witness testimony can provide additional information, but their recollections may differ. The most important distinction is what the investigators learn following an incident, and what the personnel would reasonably have known in the moment.
One Tab Doesn’t Always Mean One Drinker
Understanding the reports at point of sale requires years of experience in hospitality. A customer might purchase several rounds of drinks for their friends. Bottle-service transactions may involve more than one person. Bartenders can process separate orders, without identifying the previous order of another employee.
Alcohol experts are able to examine the amounts of alcohol consumed and the time it took to complete transactions along with surveillance videos as well as staffing information to develop a better service timeline.
The analysis could reveal moments when employees had an opportunity to spot intoxication or intervene. It may also identify areas where there is no evidence to determine who consumed particular drinks.
The floor is where the Training Matters
Although certifications of employees are crucial however, they don’t always accurately reflect the way an establishment was run during a particular shift.
An investigation may consider whether training was in order, whether employees were aware of the procedures to intervene, and whether managers reinforced the policies of the establishment.
Preston Rideout brings approximately three decades of hospitality operations experience to this work, including bartending, nightclub management, and beverage-program consulting.
Based on his professional credentials He also has 112 seller/server certifications that are valid for 48 states and District of Columbia.
This allows him to look at the training that employees received as well as the operational decisions they made. Bartenders, for example could spot a problem but don’t know how to reach management or report a denial of services. In the end, the level of supervision just as important as an employee’s behavior.
Insurance Investigations could ask similar Questions
A witness from the Liquor liability specialist typically addresses the same operational concerns for insurers and coverage counsel as well as defense lawyers. Even though the terms used might differ, the examination remains focused on alcohol service, employee conduct, management oversight, and training.
A thorough review could comprise incident reports, written policy documents videos, written policies, employee schedules, certification records, and deposition testimony. It’s not the role of the expert to endorse the company that employs them. The responsibility of the expert is to present the findings to identify practices in the industry and identify the significant limitations.
Experience is a key factor in determining the reasons that drive the records
Rideout has been a witness in alcohol-related and hospitality issues across eleven states, working with both defense and plaintiff counsel.
His research focuses on bars, nightclubs, restaurants, hotels resorts, casinos, and other venues where alcohol service is part of daily operations. Each setting is unique in terms of staffing and issues with supervision.
A bartender serving a small dining area in a restaurant may be able to observe patrons than employees at a busy nightclub service station. Knowing the differences can assist you in placing evidence into its appropriate operational context.
The credibility of opinions doesn’t fill in gaps with assumptions
Dram shop laws differ by jurisdiction. Expert evidence from experts in operational matters cannot be interpreted as an official decision. The strongest analyses explain what employees did and the service practices that are required. They also provide conclusion that is drawn from the evidence.
Sometimes, records indicate that a deviation was made from the prescribed procedure. In other instances, they prove that employees followed the appropriate procedures or left important questions unanswered.
If lawyers are evaluating claims related to alcohol, that distinction matters. A useful expert opinion does more than describe the incident. It helps the court know what was going on inside the premises even before the night ended.
