Bartenders in nightclubs know their stuff with alcohol-related policies, written down, and an experienced supervisor at each shift. The security measures may appear reassuring when they are included in an employee manual.
But imagine a packed Saturday night, where multiple bartenders serve the same customers, a floor manager is managing a disturbance, and customers are ordering drinks at different places. Who’s responsible for determining if an individual shouldn’t drink in the future?
This could reveal something more about a liquor store lawsuit than simply finding out how many drinks have been sold.
At first, the staff can see the signs of an overservice investigation.
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether the alcohol-related decisions made by employees were in line with the accepted industry norms and the conditions employees confronted.
The intoxication of a customer cannot prove by itself that the bartender was aware of warning signs while serving. The investigation should consider the customer’s behavior, service timing, and staff observations.
Surveillance footage may reveal difficulty walking, unusual movements or interactions with employees. The testimony of witnesses could provide context to the incident even though their recollections may be differing. What is most important to differentiate between is what investigators have learned after an incident, and what the staff ought to have known at the time of the incident.
One tab doesn’t necessarily mean One Drinker
The point-of sale records are helpful, but they require hospitality experience to understand. A single customer might purchase many rounds of drinks for friends. Multiple people may be involved in the transaction of a bottle. Bartenders can take separate orders, without identifying the previous order of another employee.
Alcohol experts can look over the duration of transactions, drinks consumed, surveillance video, and staffing records in order to develop a comprehensive timeline.
The analysis may reveal instances where employees might have intervened, or recognized that they were intoxicated. This analysis can also show where there is not enough evidence to determine the individual who consumed one particular beverage.
The floor is where the training takes place.
The certifications of employees are vital but they’re not a guarantee to reveal how a location was run during a specific shift.
A thorough investigation can determine if training was in order, whether employees knew the correct procedures for intervention, and whether managers reinforced the establishment’s policies.
Preston Rideout is a specialist in hospitality who has more than three decades of expertise. This includes management, bartending and beverage-program consultation.
Professionally, his credentials show that he holds 112 seller server certificates that cover 48 states, in addition to the District of Columbia.
This combination allows him both to review the training staff received as well as the operational decisions they had to take. For example Bartenders may recognize the problem but have no clear direction about contacting management or documenting a refusal of service. Insufficient supervision could thus be as crucial as the employee’s individual actions.
Insurance investigations may pose similar Questions
A Liquor liability expert witness frequently addresses the same operational issues for insurers, coverage counsel, and defense attorneys. While the terms used could be different, the investigation is still centered on alcohol service, employee conduct control, management oversight, as well as training.
The detailed review could comprise incidents reports, as well as written policies, video recording schedules for employees, and certification records. The expert’s job to support the person who is seeking them. The expert should explain why the data supports, describe pertinent practices within the industry and be aware of any limitations.
Experience is a key factor in determining the reasons behind the records
Rideout has worked with plaintiffs and defendants across 11 states to provide testimony in hospitality, hospitality and alcohol-related issues.
The analysis focuses on bars, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels resorts, casinos, and other hospitality establishments in which alcohol is a part of the day-to-day operations. Each environment has different requirements for staffing and supervisory management.
The bartender who works in a small dining room at the restaurant might have different opportunities to observe customers than an employee of a nightclub working at a bustling service station. Knowing these differences will help put the evidence within its proper operational context.
It is not possible to fill in gaps by making assumptions
Dram shop laws differ by locality. Expert testimony from operational experts shouldn’t be taken as an official decision. The most robust analyses clarify the actions of employees and what practices for service are needed. They also provide conclusions that can be reasonably drawn from the evidence.
Sometimes, the documents reveal the absence of established procedures. In other cases, they demonstrate that employees followed appropriate guidelines or left crucial questions unanswered.
It is essential to distinguish between the two when in evaluating claims involving alcohol. Expert opinions are more than a description of the event. It allows the court to know what was going on inside the establishment even before the time of the night was over.