Each nightclub needs to have bartenders who are trained and abide by written alcohol guidelines. Also, they should have a knowledgeable manager for every shift. They can appear as like a peace of mind when they’re included in an employee’s manual.
Imagine a Saturday night that is busy, with several bartenders serving the exact same group of customers, while a floor manager deals with crowds and customers placing orders for drinks from various venues. Who is responsible for determining if somebody shouldn’t have alcohol at all?
This question is more telling in dram shops litigation instead of merely determining the amount of drinks that are sold.
Overservice investigations begin with what Staff members might see
A Dram Shop expert witness examines whether alcohol-service decisions were consistent with established industry practices and the actual circumstances employees faced.
A customer’s eventual intoxication does not by itself establish that a bartender observed recognizable warning signs during service. The investigation should take into account the behavior of the customer, the time of service, and the observations of staff.
Surveillance footage could reveal an inability to walk, odd actions, or even interactions with employees. The testimony of witnesses can give context to the event, even if recollections are differing. The important distinction is between the knowledge of investigators following an incident, and what staff reasonably could recognize in the moment.
One Tab Doesn’t Always Mean One Drink
Interpreting point-of-sale reports requires an understanding of hospitality. A single buyer could purchase several rounds for their friends. A bottle-service purchase could include multiple customers. Separate bartenders may process orders without recognizing that another employee was serving the order.
Alcohol expert witnesses can examine quantity of drinks consumed and transaction times along with surveillance videos as well as staffing information to make a better timeline for service.
This analysis may reveal moments where employees were able to intervene or realize the signs of intoxication. It could also be used to find instances where evidence is not enough to determine who drank certain beverages.
The importance of training is when it reaches the floor
Employee certifications are important, but they don’t automatically establish how a venue worked during a specific shift.
Checking if the training program is up to date, if employees are aware of the intervention procedure and if managers reinforce the guidelines can be a part of the investigation.
Preston Rideout has over 30 years experience working in the hospitality industry, including management of nightclubs and bartending. He also offers beverage program consulting.
He also holds 112 seller-server certifications covering 48 states and the District of Columbia, according to his professional qualifications.
The combination of both lets him examine the level of training employees were given and their practical decisions. For instance the bartender may be aware of some issues, but not have clear instructions on how to contact management or logging a denial of service. This means that the level of supervision just as important as an employee’s actions.
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. Although the terminology used may differ, the examination is still focused on alcohol service, employee conduct, management oversight, and training.
The comprehensive review may include incident reports, written policies, video recording schedules for employees, and certification records. The responsibility of the expert is not to support the person who is retaining them. The duty of an expert is to present the findings, identify industry practices and acknowledge the limitations that are significant.
Experience is a key factor in determining the reasons that drive the documents
Rideout has served as an alcohol service witness and hospitality matters in 11 states. He has acted for both the plaintiff and defense lawyers.
His research covers bars, nightclubs and hotels and resorts, as well as casinos, and other venues in which alcohol is frequently served. Each environment presents different management structures and supervisory problems.
A bartender working in a restaurant’s small dining room might have a better opportunity to watch customers than a worker at a counter serving drinks in a nightclub. Knowing the differences will allow you to understand the data into its correct operational context.
Credible opinion doesn’t fill gaps by making assumptions
The laws for a dram shop differ in each state. Operational expert testimony is not the equivalent to a legal ruling. The most comprehensive analyses provide a clear explanation of what employees did and what practices for service are needed. They also provide conclusion that is made from the data.
Sometimes, the records reveal that a deviance was made from the accepted procedure. In other instances, they show that employees adhered to appropriate guidelines or left crucial questions unanswered.
This distinction is important for attorneys who are evaluating cases involving alcohol. A professional’s advice which is valuable does more than just describe what happened. It allows the judge to understand what was happening inside the premises even before the time of the night was over.