Nightclubs can include bartenders with training with written alcohol policy, as well as a skilled manager on each shift. These safeguards could be reassured in an employee handbook.
Imagine a Saturday night when several bartenders are serving the same crowd. The floor manager is dealing with problems, and customers are ordering drinks from several places. Who will be responsible for determining when a person should not consume alcohol?
This is a more important issue in dram shops litigation than simply determining the quantity of drinks sold.
Overservice Investigations Begin With What Staff members might see
Dram Shop expert witnesses examine whether alcohol-related decisions are in accordance with recognized industry practice and the actual conditions that employees encountered.
A person’s intoxication may not, by itself, demonstrate that a bartender saw obvious warning signs while serving. The investigation should look at the manner in which the customer behaved, the service timing, and the observations of staff.
Surveillance video can uncover a lack of ability to walk, unusual actions, or even interactions with employees. Witness statements can provide additional background, however their perceptions may differ. It is crucial to differentiate between what investigators knew following an incident and what staff could have reasonably expected to know in the moment.
One Tab Doesn’t Have to Mean One Drink
In order to interpret reports from the point of sale, you need prior experience in hospitality. A single customer might purchase many rounds of drinks for friends. Bottle-service transactions could be performed by more than one person. Separate bartenders could handle orders without knowing what the previous employee did.
Alcohol expert witnesses are able to review the timings of transactions, alcohol consumption, video surveillance, and the records of staffing in order to create a complete timeline.
The analysis will reveal instances where employees may have acted or detected intoxication. It can also reveal where the evidence is insufficient to establish who consumed certain beverages.
Training is only relevant when it reaches the floor
Employee certifications are important but they’re not a guarantee to define how a facility was run during a specific shift.
An investigation could examine whether training was current, whether employees were aware of the procedures to intervene, and whether managers reinforced the company’s policies.
Preston Rideout brings more than three decades of experience in operations for hospitality in this field, which includes bartending, nightclub management and consulting on beverage programs.
His professional qualifications also show that he holds 112 seller server certificates covering 48 states, plus the District of Columbia.
This combination allows him both to examine the training employees received and the operational decisions they had to make. For instance the bartender may be aware of some issues, but not have clear directions on how to communicate with management or documenting a refusal of service. This means that the level of supervision just as important as an employee’s behavior.
Insurance Investigations may ask similar Questions
A Liquor liability expert witness frequently addresses the same operational issues for insurers, coverage counsel, and defense attorneys. The terms may vary, but the underlying investigation remains focused on the alcohol service, conduct of staff training, supervision of management.
The comprehensive review may include incident reports, written policies, videos schedules for employees, and certification records. The expert’s responsibility is not to automatically support the party that is keeping them. The expert must clarify what the evidence supports, identify relevant practices in the business and recognize any limitations.
Experience helps explain the decisions behind the records
Rideout has been a witness in alcohol service and hospitality matters in 11 states. He has acted for both the plaintiff and defense lawyers.
His research covers bars, nightclubs, hotels and other establishments along with resorts, casinos and other settings where alcohol is served on a regular basis. Each setting is unique with regard to staffing and the challenges of supervision.
The bartender in a small dining area of the restaurant might be able to see different aspects of customers than an employee of a nightclub working at a bustling service station. Knowing these distinctions allows you to place the evidence in its proper context.
Credible opinions don’t fill in holes with assumptions
The laws governing a shop’s ramifications differ by region, and operational expert testimony cannot be confused with the legal definition of responsibility. The most robust analyses clarify the actions of employees and what practices for service are needed. They also confirm the conclusions that are able to be drawn from the evidence.
Sometimes, records indicate the absence of established procedures. Sometimes, the records reveal that employees followed proper methods or left critical questions unanswered.
This distinction is important for lawyers who are evaluating cases involving alcohol. An expert opinion is more than a narrative of the incident. The court can better understand the decisions made in the establishment, even if no one could predict what the final outcome would be.