Nightclubs can employ bartenders who are trained, have alcohol policies written down, and an experienced manager at every shift. These security measures could be at times as reassuring if they are included in a manual for employees.
But imagine a crowded Saturday night where several bartenders are serving the same patrons or a floor manager taking care of a disturbance, while customers are ordering rounds at different places. Who will be responsible to recognize when someone is no longer eligible to drink alcohol?
This is a more important issue in dram shops litigation more than just determining the quantity of drinks that are sold.
Overservice Investigations Begin with What Staff Could See
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, on its own, that the bartender saw warning signs while serving. The investigation should take into account the behavior of the customer and the time of service, the observations of staff and evidence available.
Surveillance footage can reveal issues with walking, unusual movements or interactions with employees. Witnesses’ testimony can add context to the situation, even if recollections are differing. It is crucial to differentiate between what investigators knew after the incident and what personnel could have reasonably known in the moment.
One Tab Doesn’t Mean One Drink
These records can be useful however, understanding them require experience with hospitality. A single buyer could purchase several rounds for friends. Bottle-service transactions could require more than one person. Bartenders are able to process multiple orders without knowing about the previous order placed by another employee.
Alcohol expert witnesses can review transaction times, drink quantities as well as video surveillance and the records of staffing in order to develop a comprehensive timeline.
The analysis will reveal instances in which employees might have intervened or recognized intoxication. It could also help identify instances where the evidence is insufficient to determine who consumed particular beverages.
Training Is Important Only When It Gets to the Floor
The accreditation of employees is vital however it doesn’t necessarily determine how a place worked during a specific shift.
An investigation may consider whether training was in order, whether employees were aware of the procedures to intervene and whether the managers emphasized the institution’s rules and regulations.
Preston Rideout is a seasoned hospitality professional with more than three decades of expertise. This includes management, bartending and consultation on beverage-related programs.
Based on his professional credentials, he also holds 112 seller/server certificates that encompass 48 states as well as the District of Columbia.
The combination of the two allows him to look at the education that employees received as well as their actual decision-making. Bartenders, for example, might be able to identify a behavior that is alarming, but they may not be given clear guidelines on how to report it, or even how to reach management. Therefore, it is essential to consider the supervisor’s ability to supervise.
Insurance investigations may ask similar questions
Expert witnesses in Liquor Liability typically deal with the same operational issues for insurance companies attorneys, coverage counsel, and defense lawyers. Though the language might differ however, the fundamental issue that is being investigated concerns the service of alcohol and the conduct of staff.
An exhaustive review can include incidents reports, written policies recordings of video and employee schedules. It could also include certification records, and deposition testimony. It’s not the expert’s job to help the person who is seeking them. The role of the expert is to present the findings that they have discovered, to determine the best practices for industry and identify the significant limitations.
Experience can help explain the decision-making That Drive the Records
Rideout has worked with defendants and plaintiffs in 11 states, to give testimony on hospitality, hospitality and alcohol-related matters.
His research covers bars, nightclubs and hotels, as well resorts, casinos and other places in which alcohol is served on a regular basis. Each setting has its own issues with staffing and supervision.
The bartender who works in a small dining room in an eatery may be able to see different aspects of customers than an employee of a nightclub who works at a busy service station. Understanding these differences allows you to place the evidence in its proper context.
The credibility of opinions doesn’t fill in gaps with assumptions
Dram shop laws differ depending on region, and operational expert testimony should not be confused with an official determination of the liability. The most effective analysis will clarify the activities of the employees and what recognized practices were in place, and which conclusions are reasonable on the basis of the evidence.
Sometimes the records reveal the absence of established procedures. The records also show employees didn’t adhere to the proper procedure or left important questions unanswered.
In the case of attorneys who evaluate alcohol-related claims this distinction is critical. An expert opinion is useful and does more than simply describe the incident. The court is able to understand how decisions were made within the institution, even if nobody knew what the outcome would be.