A receipt from a restaurant shows a customer ordering several alcoholic beverages. Hours later, that customer is involved in a fatal traffic collision. If an attorney is investigating possible dram shop liability, the receipt is relevant. But it doesn’t automatically establish whether the establishment served an obviously intoxicated person or whether employees failed to follow the correct procedures. The most revealing evidence could be what transpired between those drinks ordered.
Understanding this sequence requires studying the alcohol service as a hospitality service, not just the counting of drinks after an incident.
A receipt is a record of a purchase but not the state of a buyer
The records at the point of sale can reveal the dates when transactions took place, which beverages were purchased, and how the charges were allocated to the tab.
The receipt will not reveal the behavior of a person when they were served an alcohol drink. It may not establish who was drinking each drink as well as whether drinks were shared, nor what a bartender observed.
An experienced Expert Witness can help attorneys interpret these records alongside surveillance footage, employee statements, and other available evidence. The goal is to retrace the sequence of service without assuming that every purchase tells the whole story.
What can employees observe in reality?
The most important issue in alcohol-service disputes is whether staff had recognizable reasons to believe that a customer was drunk. The relevant observations might include impaired coordination, strange speaking or speech patterns, difficulties maintaining equilibrium or observable behavioral changes.
But these indicators require some context. One incident recorded on surveillance footage could have a reason that isn’t related to alcohol consumption. Investigators should consider the camera’s angle, quality of the recording, employee position, and whether a specific behavior was apparent to employees.
Preston Rideout brings experience as bartender, manager of the bar as well as nightclub general manager as well as director of bar operations to these evaluations. His background in operation helps connect documentation with the obligations and practical limitations of employees working in busy hospitality environments.
Written Training Doesn’t Always Describe Real Practice
A majority of alcohol-related investigation investigations ask questions about employee preparation. Does the establishment offer the seller-servers training for its employees? Did the establishment provide training to employees to recognize intoxication potential? Have managers explained to employees the process to deny service?
The answers to these questions could be in the training certificates, but they are not sufficient.
The venue may have policies in place but fail to follow them consistently. In contrast, employees might have followed recognized service practices regardless of the outcome was devastating.
A review of operations considers the documents for training, testimony from employees, management oversight, and the actions that were documented during the incident. Plaintiffs as well as defense attorneys are able to benefit from a distinction between the presence of a policy and its actual implementation.
The Timeline Often Reveals the Important Questions
Imagine a customer who is served by several bartenders the same time in an evening of high activity. The first employee might be observing normal behaviour. A bartender in a different location might serve a different drink following an alteration in shift. A manager could intervened following the shift change.
It is possible to make these decisions appear to be one continuous service, without having to reconstruct the time line. Reviewing all the data such as transaction records and staffing schedules, as well as surveillance footage and incident reports together can reveal who was in charge and when. It is better to determine if there are any missing documents or footage instead of speculating.
Lawful Liability and Practices in Industry are two different questions
Hospitality professionals are able to explain the recognized operating practices of a place and assess whether its actions are in accordance with these rules.
They don’t replace the legal responsibility of the court to determine the legal responsibility. The laws governing alcohol shops vary from state to state and so do the terms under which they may be legally sued.
Rideout Hospitality Consulting assists plaintiff and defendant lawyers across the country with review of the case, analysis of operations, writing opinions, and depositions. The work of the company includes alcohol-related decision-making, staff training management practices, as well as other related hospitality operations.
The strongest analysis accounts for What the Evidence Cannot Show
The gravity of an alcohol-related event cannot decide the truth of all previous information.
Attorneys must understand the available records, the limitations of those records, and the way employees were expected to perform under the circumstances.
A thorough analysis of hospitality can discern between documented and the assumed behavior and identify which practices of the place are consistent with or divergent from established standards. This allows courts to determine the circumstances rather than having to rely on only what was later discovered.