Every nightclub should be equipped with bartenders trained and have written alcohol guidelines. They should also have a knowledgeable manager for every shift. These safeguards could be reassured in a handbook for employees.
Imagine a crowded Saturday night where several bartenders serve the same group. A floor manager has to deal with an issue, and patrons purchase drinks from multiple places. Who’s accountable for determining when anyone shouldn’t be drinking or not?
This aspect is more crucial in the dram shop litigation process than simply determining the quantity of drinks being sold.
The first step in a probe into overservice is to find out what the staff could see
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-service decisions were consistent with industry standards and the circumstances employees actually faced.
The fact that a customer may be drunk does not, by itself, demonstrate that a bartender saw distinct warning signs in the course of service. The investigation must consider the behavior of the client as well as the timing of the service, observations by staff, as well as any other evidence.
Surveillance footage can reveal issues with walking, odd movements or even interactions with employees. Statements from witnesses can provide additional information, but their recollections could differ. It is essential to differentiate between what investigators knew after the incident and what the staff could reasonably have known at the time.
One Tab Doesn’t Always Mean One Drinker
Interpreting point-of-sale reports requires experience in hospitality. A single buyer could purchase several rounds for their friends. A bottle-service transaction may involve multiple people. Bartenders can take separate orders without knowing about the previous order of an employee.
Alcohol expert witnesses can review the timings of transactions, alcohol consumption video surveillance, as well as records of staffing to establish a complete timeline.
The analysis could reveal instances where employees were able to intervene or realize the fact that they were drunk. It can also reveal where the evidence isn’t sufficient to determine who had consumed specific drinks.
Training is only relevant when it Gets to the Floor
Certifications for employees are essential however, they don’t establish how a venue was run during a specific shift.
An investigation could examine whether the training was up-to-date, if employees knew the correct procedures for intervention and whether supervisors reinforced the establishment’s policies.
Preston Rideout brings approximately three decades of operational experience in the hospitality industry in this field, which includes bartending, nightclub management and drink-program consultancy.
Professionally, his credentials show that he holds 112 seller-server certificates that cover 48 states, in addition to the District of Columbia.
The combination of the two will allow him to analyze the amount of training employees received as well as their operational decision-making. Bartenders, for instance could spot an issue but may not be able to communicate with management or record a refusal of services. Therefore, the level of supervision is just as important as an employee’s behavior.
Insurance investigations might ask similar inquiries.
A Liquor liability expert witness frequently addresses the same operational issues for insurers, coverage counsel, and defense attorneys. While the language used may differ but the core issue is the service of alcohol and the conduct of staff.
An in-depth review can include incidents reports as well as written policies. They could also comprise video recordings of employee schedules, employee calendars or other certification records. Experts’ role is not to automatically support the party retaining them. The responsibility of the expert is to provide an explanation of the findings, identify industry practices and recognize meaningful limitations.
Experience is the reason for the decisions that led to the records
Rideout has been a witness in alcohol service and hospitality cases across eleven states. He has acted on behalf of both plaintiffs and defense lawyers.
His research covers bars, nightclubs, hotels and other establishments, as well resorts, casinos and other locations in which alcohol is frequently served. Each environment has different requirements for staffing and supervisory management.
A bartender working in a tiny dining area in a restaurant may be able to observe the customers than employees at a busy nightclub service station. Knowing these distinctions allows you to put the evidence in its proper context.
Trustworthy opinions can’t fill in gaps with assumptions
Dram shop laws vary by locality. Expert evidence from experts in operational matters shouldn’t be taken as a legal determination. The most effective analysis will clarify the actions of employees and what recognized practices were in place, and which conclusions are based on the evidence.
Sometimes, records show that an error occurred from the prescribed procedure. They may also indicate that the employee was following proper procedures or didn’t answer the most important questions.
This distinction is important for lawyers who are evaluating cases involving alcohol. An expert’s opinion which is valuable does more than just describe what happened. It helps the court understand the decisions that were made in the establishment, before any one knew how the night would conclude.
