A receipt at a restaurant shows a customer drinking a variety of alcohol drinks. After a few hours the same person is involved in a serious accident. For an attorney investigating potential liability of a dram shop the receipt can be used as evidence. It doesn’t necessarily establish if the establishment served someone who clearly drunk, or if employees didn’t follow procedures. What transpired during the time between drinks orders might be more important.
To comprehend this sequence, it is important to look at the alcohol service as a hospitality process and not simply count beverages after an event.
A receipt is a record of a sale, but not a stipulation of the buyer
The point-of-sale record is used to identify when the transaction occurred, what drinks were bought and the charges are assigned to a tab.
The receipt does not reflect the customer’s behavior when the beverage was ordered. It may not be able to reveal the individual who drank each drink in the event that drinks were served in a shared manner, and what the bartender observed.
An experienced Expert Witness can help attorneys interpret these records alongside surveillance footage, employee statements, and other available evidence. The objective is to reconstruct the service flow without thinking that every purchase tells the complete story.
What Could Employees Actually Observe?
The main issue in disputes involving alcohol-related services is whether the staff had the basis to conclude that the client was drunk. Some of the relevant observations could be impaired coordination, speech that is unusual, difficulty maintaining balance, or a noticeable change in behavior.
But these indicators require the context. Even a single act captured in surveillance footage could be unrelated to alcohol. Investigators should also take into consideration camera angles, quality of recording, employee positions, and whether particular behavior would be visible to the staff.
Preston Rideout’s work as a bartender with experience as well as manager of a bar and general manager of nightclubs, and director of bar operations is apparent in these reviews. His experience in operations helps link recorded evidence with the responsibilities and limitations of staff working in busy environments.
Written Training Doesn’t Always Describe Real Practice
The majority of alcohol-related investigation concentrate on preparation for employees. Does the establishment offer employee training in the area of seller-server? Was the establishment able to teach its employees how to identify intoxication? Did management provide procedures for refusing additional service?
These are crucial to responsible alcohol service but reviewing training certificates alone may not provide the answers.
It is possible for a place to have detailed policies, but not necessarily implement them. In contrast employees may have followed the guidelines even if the incident was tragic.
A review of operations examines training materials and employee testimony. The review also examines supervision by management and the actions documented during the incident. Defense attorneys and plaintiffs can benefit from a clear distinction between the existence of a policy and its actual execution.
Timeline can answer crucial information that can answer important
Think about a client being served by multiple bartenders at the same time during an evening of high activity. The first employee may have noticed normal behaviour. A bartender in a different location might serve another drink following the shift change. A manager might intervened following the shift change.
These decisions can appear as unending service, in the event that the timeline is not reconstitued. If you are reviewing transaction logs, staffing plans, incidents and surveillance footage it’s helpful to identify who was aware of what, and at what time. It’s better to find gaps in the footage or documents than relying on speculation.
Legal Liability and Industry Practice are Different Questions
Hospitality experts can describe accepted operational practices and determine if a venue’s conduct was consistent with them.
They don’t replace the court’s responsibility to determine legal liability. There are different laws in each state regarding the legal liability of retailers selling alcohol.
Rideout Hospitality Consulting assists plaintiff and defendant attorneys across the nation with review of the case, analysis of operations, written opinions and depositions. Its work focuses on alcohol-service decision-making and staff training.
The Strongest Analysis Accounts for what the Evidence cannot show
The seriousness of an alcohol-related incident cannot be a conclusive indicator of the previous circumstances.
Attorneys should be aware of documents available, the limitations of the records and the manner in which employees were expected function under the conditions.
A thorough hospitality analysis can distinguish evidence from an assumption and explains where the venue’s practices were in line with or diverged from the accepted norms. The courts can then evaluate the actual event rather than relying solely on the information they gathered later.