A receipt from an eatery shows a patron who has ordered several drinks of alcohol. The customer was involved in a serious car accident a few hours after the incident. For an attorney investigating potential dram shop liability the receipt will be relevant. It does not have to establish that the restaurant served a clearly drunk client or that employees did not adhere to the proper procedure. What transpired between the drink orders might be more important.
In order to understand the sequence, you must consider the alcohol service as part of a hospitality business. It is not possible to count drinks after an incident.
Receipts record a sale but not the state of a buyer
Point-of-sale records can establish when transactions occurred, which beverages were purchased, and how the charges were allocated to the tab.
The receipt may not reveal what the customer’s actions were when the drink was ordered. The receipt may not reveal the drinkers who consumed it, if drinks were shared, or the manner in which the bartender viewed it.
An experienced Expert Witness can help lawyers interpret these records in relation to the surveillance footage, statements of employees as well as other evidence. The goal is to reconstruct the entire service process without believing that each purchase will tell the complete story.
What can employees observe?
In many disputes over alcohol service, the most important concern is whether or not the staff had a reason to suspect that the customer was drinking. Some of the relevant indicators could be diminished coordination, atypical speaking and a difficulty in maintaining equilibrium or observable behavioral changes.
But these indicators require the context. A single incident on surveillance video could have an explanation unrelated to alcohol. Investigators should also take into account the camera angle, the recording quality location of employees, and the degree to which an incident was evident to the staff.
Preston Rideout brings experience as a bartender, bar manager, nightclub general manager, and director of bar operations to these evaluations. His experience in operations helps him identify the duties and limitations of employees who work in hectic hospitality environments.
Written Training Doesn’t Always Describe Real Practice
In the majority of investigations involving alcohol the questions revolve around the preparation of the employee. Does the establishment provide the seller-servers training for its employees? Did the establishment instruct employees to detect signs of intoxication? Did management explain to employees the process to refuse additional service?
While these questions are important for the Responsible Alcohol Service, examining only training certificates may not be enough to address them.
A venue might maintain detailed guidelines but not always follow them. In contrast, an employee may have followed the guidelines even though it was a tragedy.
A review of operations takes into account documents for training and the testimony of employees. It also considers supervision by management and the actions that were documented in the incident. It is crucial for attorneys representing the plaintiffs and defense to distinguish between the existence of the policy and the way it is implemented.
Timeline often provides answers to crucial information
Imagine a person being served drinks by various bartenders at a busy time. The first employee may be observing normal behaviour. After a shift change, a second bartender may have served a different drink. Later, a manager may have intervened.
It is possible to make these decisions appear to be a single continuous action without retracing the timeline. Analyzing all the records, including transaction records and staffing plans as well as surveillance footage and an incident report together can help clarify who was responsible and for what. The absence of footage or the inadequacy of records must be identified, instead of being replaced by speculation.
Lawful Liability and Industry Practice Are Different Questions
Experts in hospitality can explain the recognized operating practices of a facility and decide whether its actions are in line with these practices.
They don’t replace the courts’ responsibility to determine legal liability. There are various laws in each state concerning the legal liability of retailers selling alcohol.
Rideout Hospitality Consulting provides support to defense attorneys and plaintiffs in the United States through review of cases, operational analysis and written opinions and trial testimony, depositions and other forms of evidence. The company’s work focuses on alcohol-related decisions and staff training, as well as management practices, and other related hospitality operations.
The most thorough analysis clarifies what the evidence does not show
An alcohol-related incident can cause a lot of damage, but the severity of the incident cannot establish every earlier fact.
Lawyers should be able to identify the documents that are accessible and their limitations in addition to how employees would have been expected to behave in specific circumstances.
An in-depth analysis of hospitality can separate the actions that are documented from assumptions and clarifies where the establishment’s practices matched up with or diverged from recognized standards. This distinction allows courts to evaluate the events that actually occurred rather than solely relying on what became known following the fact.
