Each nightclub needs to have bartenders who are trained and abide by written alcohol policies. They also need an experienced manager for each shift. A handbook for employees contains these policies can be a source of comfort.
But imagine a packed Saturday night, when 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 recognizing if anyone shouldn’t be drinking or not?
This type of question could reveal something more about a liquor store lawsuit than just knowing how many bottles were sold.
Overservice Investigations Begin With What Staff Members Could See
Dram Shop expert witnesses examine whether alcohol-service decision were consistent with industry norms and the real-life circumstances employees were confronted with.
The presence of alcohol in a person cannot prove by itself that the bartender spotted warning signs when serving. Investigations must take into account the behavior of the client, the timing of the service, any observations made by personnel, and any evidence.
Surveillance footage can show an inability to walk, strange movement, or interaction with employees. Witness testimony can provide additional information, but their recollections may differ. What’s important to differentiate between is the information investigators learnt after an incident, and what the staff should have known at the time of the incident.
One Tab isn’t a necessity. One Drink
The points-of-sale records are helpful, but they require experience with hospitality to interpret. A single buyer could purchase multiple rounds of wine for friends. Bottle-service transactions can be involving multiple individuals. Bartenders can take separate orders, without identifying the previous order of another employee.
An Alcohol expert witness can examine transaction times, beverage quantities, surveillance recordings, and staffing records to develop a more complete service timeline.
This investigation could reveal times when employees were able intervene or recognize that they were drinking. It can also identify when there isn’t enough evidence to establish the person who consumed a particular drink.
It is important to train only when it’s on the ground
Employee certifications are important however, they don’t define how a facility operated during a particular shift.
The investigation of whether the training is up-to-date, whether employees understand intervention procedures and if managers reinforce the policies could be part of the investigation.
Preston Rideout has over 30 years of experience in the hospitality industry, which includes management of nightclubs and bartending. He also provides advice on beverage programs.
The professional credentials of his work also indicate that he has 112 seller-server certificates that cover 48 states, in addition to the District of Columbia.
This combination allows him both to examine the training employees received, as well as the operational decisions that they faced. Bartenders, for instance could be able to spot a pattern that is concerning but may not be given clear guidelines regarding how to report it or how to contact management. The adequacy of supervision can thus be as crucial as the individual employee’s actions.
Insurance investigations might ask similar questions.
A specialist witness for liquor liability typically will address the same operational problems for coverage counsel as well as insurers and defense attorneys. The terminology might differ, but the underlying inquiry still involves alcohol service, staff behavior training, as well as supervision of management.
A thorough review may include incidents reports, written policies and procedures, videos and employee schedules. It could also include certification documents, and deposition evidence. It’s not the role of the expert to endorse the party that retains them. The duty of an expert is to present the findings to identify practices in the industry and recognize meaningful limitations.
Experience Explains the Decisions behind the Records
Rideout has testified in alcohol-service and hospitality cases in 11 states, and has worked as both defense and plaintiff counsel.
His research covers bars, nightclubs, hotels and other establishments along with resorts, casinos and other places where alcohol is offered on a regular basis. Each environment presents different management structures and supervisory problems.
A bartender in a restaurant’s dining room might have more opportunities to observe customers more than a staff member at a counter serving drinks in a nightclub. Knowing the differences will allow you to put the evidence in its proper context.
An opinion that is credible doesn’t fill Gaps With Assumptions
Dram shop laws differ depending on the jurisdiction and expert testimony is not to be confused the legal definition of the liability. The most thorough analyses describe what employees did and what service practices are required. They also back the conclusions that can be reasonably made from the data.
Sometimes, the records show the absence of established procedures. In other instances, they demonstrate that employees followed appropriate procedures or left important questions unanswered.
It is important to distinguish between these two types of lawyers when looking at alcohol-related claims. A professional’s advice that is helpful does more than just describe the events. It allows the court to understand what was happening inside the establishment before the night ended.