Each nightclub needs to be equipped with bartenders trained and have written alcohol policies. Also, they should have an experienced manager for every shift. These safeguards might look like a peace of mind when they’re included in the employee handbook.
Imagine an evening on a Saturday that is packed, with bartenders serving the same number of customers, while the floor manager manages the crowd and customers who are ordering drinks at various places. Who is responsible for determining if anyone shouldn’t be drinking or not?
In the context of litigation involving dram shops, that question can be more important than determining how many drinks were sold.
For starters, staff can see the signs of a possible overservice investigation.
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-service decisions were consistent with recognized industry practices and the circumstances employees actually encountered.
A customer’s intoxication doesn’t prove, by itself that the bartender noticed warning signs when serving. The investigation must consider the behavior of the customer, the timing of service and the observations of staff.
Surveillance footage could reveal difficulties walking, unusual movements, or interactions with employees. The testimony of witnesses can give additional context, although recollections may differ. The most important thing to distinguish between is what investigators have learned after an incident, and what staff should have known at the time.
One Tab Doesn’t Always Mean One Drink
The point-of-sale record is useful however, their interpretation requires experience in hospitality. A patron could purchase multiple rounds of beer for friends. There could be multiple people involved in bottle-service transactions. Separate bartenders could complete orders without knowing the name of the previous employee did.
Alcohol expert witnesses can review time of transactions, quantities of alcohol consumed video surveillance, as well as records of staffing to create a complete timeline.
The analysis can reveal instances where employees may have intervened, or recognized that they were intoxicated. It also can reveal instances when the evidence is insufficient to establish who drank particular drinks.
Training is Important Only Once It Reaches the Floor
Employee certifications are important, but they don’t automatically define how a facility performed during a particular shift.
An investigation might examine whether training was on-point, whether employees were aware of intervention procedures and whether supervisors reinforced the institution’s rules and regulations.
Preston Rideout brings over three decades of operational experience in the hospitality industry to his job, including bartending, managing nightclubs, and consulting on beverage programs.
According to his professional qualifications, he also holds 112 certifications for seller/server that cover 48 states and District of Columbia.
This allows him to examine both the training employees received and the operational decisions they had to make. A bartender, for example may be able to spot a problem but not be able to communicate with management or record a refusal of service. It is therefore important to assess the supervisor’s capacity to oversee.
Insurance investigations may pose similar Questions
Expert witnesses in Liquor Liability typically deal with the same operational issues for insurers attorneys, coverage counsel, and defense lawyers. Although the language may vary the main issue in all cases is the alcohol service and staff behavior.
The comprehensive review may include incidents reports, as well as written policies, video recording schedules of employees and records of certification. The responsibility of the expert is not to support the person in the process of retaining the expert. The expert must clarify what the data suggests, and identify relevant practices in the industry and be aware of any limitations.
The Experience of the past explains the reasoning behind the Records
Rideout has provided testimony in alcohol-related and hospitality matters in eleven states, working with both plaintiff and defense counsel.
His research covers bars, nightclubs, hotels and other establishments and resorts, as well as casinos, and other venues where alcohol is regularly served. Each setting has its own issues with staffing and supervision.
A bartender in a smaller dining room in the restaurant might have different opportunities to observe customers than a nightclub employee working at a bustling service station. Knowing the differences can help you place evidence in the proper operational context.
Trustworthy opinions can’t fill in gaps using assumptions
The laws for a dram shop differ in every jurisdiction. Operational expert testimony is not the same as a legal determination. The strongest analyses explain the actions of employees and the service practices that are needed. They also provide conclusion that can be drawn from the evidence.
Sometimes, records indicate the absence of established procedures. They might also prove that an employee complied with the correct guidelines or failed to answer crucial questions.
For attorneys evaluating alcohol-related claims it is important to distinguish between the two. A good expert opinion does more than just describe the event. It helps the court know what was going on inside the premises even before the evening was over.