Bartenders in nightclubs know their stuff, have alcohol policies written down, and have an experienced manager at every shift. They can appear as like a peace of mind when they’re included in a manual for employees.
Imagine an evening on a Saturday that is busy, with several bartenders serving a group of patrons, and a floor manager deals with the crowd and customers who are ordering drinks from various venues. Who is responsible for determining if someone shouldn’t be receiving alcohol or not?
In the context of litigation involving dram shops, the question may be more revealing than simply knowing how many bottles were sold.
For starters, staff are able to recognize the indications of an overservice investigation.
Dram Shop expert witnesses examine whether the alcohol-service decisions were in line with industry standards and the real-life circumstances employees were confronted with.
Intoxication alone is not enough to prove that the bartender knew of the warning indications. The investigation should consider the manner in which the customer behaved and the time of service, employee observations, and available evidence.
Surveillance videos may show employees interacting with each with each other, performing strange movements or having difficulties walking. The testimony of witnesses may give context to the event regardless of whether their own memories are different. What’s most important to differentiate between is what investigators learned from an incident, and what staff should have been aware of at the time of the incident.
One Tab Doesn’t Necessarily Mean One Drink
Point-of-sale records are useful however, understanding them require experience with hospitality. A customer can buy several rounds of beer to share with friends. Bottle-service transactions can require more than one person. Bartenders are able to process multiple orders without knowing about the previous order of a different employee.
An Alcohol expert witness will examine the duration of transactions, alcohol consumption as well as surveillance records and staffing records in order to establish a more complete service timeline.
This study could identify instances that employees had the opportunity to detect intoxication and intervene. It can also be used to find instances where evidence is not sufficient to determine who drank certain beverages.
The floor is where the Training Matters
While employee certificates are important however, they don’t always reflect how an establishment operated during a specific shift.
Investigations can determine whether or not the employees have been trained, if they know the correct intervention procedure, and if managers have strengthened policies.
Preston Rideout has more than 30 years experience working in the hospitality industry, including bartending and managing nightclubs. He also offers beverage program consulting.
Additionally, he holds 112 seller-server certifications covering 48 states and the District of Columbia, according to his professional qualifications.
This allows him to review the training staff received as well as operational decisions that they faced. Bartenders for instance might be able detect a behaviour that is concerning but may not have clear directions regarding how to report it, or even how to reach management. The effectiveness of supervision may thus be as crucial as the individual behavior of the employee.
The Insurance Investigation 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 alcohol service, employee conduct training, management oversight.
A thorough review could include incidents reports as well as written policies. It may also include videos as well as employee schedules and certification documents. The role of an expert isn’t to automatically support the party who is retaining them. The expert has to explain why the data suggests, and identify relevant practices in the industry and accept any limitations.
Experience helps explain the decisions behind the records
Rideout has appeared in court on alcohol-related and hospitality-related matters in 11 states, collaborating as both defense and plaintiff counsel.
His study covers bars, nightclubs and hotels, as well resorts, casinos and other locations where alcohol is regularly served. Each place has its own unique supervisory and staffing challenges.
A bartender in a restaurant’s small dining area might have more opportunities to watch customers than a worker at a nightclub service counter. Knowing these distinctions allows you to put the evidence into its correct operational context.
An opinion that is credible doesn’t fill the gaps by assuming assumptions.
Dram shop laws vary by the jurisdiction in which they are located. Expert testimony from operational experts is not a substitute for a legal determination. The most accurate analysis will reveal how the employees acted in the manner that was recognized as a service practice were required, and what conclusions are reasonable on the basis of the evidence.
Sometimes the records reveal the absence of established procedures. Other records show that employees did not adhere to the right procedures or left crucial questions unanswered.
For attorneys evaluating alcohol-related claims it is important to distinguish between the two. An expert opinion is more than a summary of the incident. It allows the judge to know what was going on inside the premises even before the time of the night was over.
