A receipt from a restaurant shows that the customer drank several alcohol-based drinks. This customer was involved in a serious car accident just a few hours following the incident. For an attorney investigating potential dram shop liability, the receipt is relevant. The receipt doesn’t necessarily demonstrate that the establishment served a clearly drunk client or that the employees failed to follow the correct procedures. What transpired during the time between drinks orders might be more relevant.
In order to understand this sequence it is essential to consider the alcohol service as a hospitality procedure and not simply count drinks after a party.
What Happens When a Patron Is Asked to Leave a Venue?
Receipts are proof of a sale not the status of a buyer
Point-of-sale records can establish the dates when transactions took place, which beverages were purchased, as well as what charges were assigned to a tab.
The receipt won’t reveal how the customer behaved when the beverage was ordered. It’s sometimes difficult to know who drank the drinks, if they were shared or if 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 sequence of service without assuming that every purchase tells the entire story.
What do employees really observe?
The primary issue in all disputes involving alcohol-related services is whether the staff members had sufficient evidence to conclude that the patron was intoxicated. The relevant indicators could include impaired coordination, speech that is unusual difficulties, balance issues or noticeable changes in behavior.
These indicators need contextualization. A single action captured on surveillance footage might have a reason that isn’t related to drinking alcohol. Investigators must also think about camera angles, recording quality position of employees and whether a particular act would be seen by the employees.
Preston Rideout brings experience as Bar manager, bartender and nightclub general manager as well as director of bar operations in these assessments. His experience in operations helps him link recorded evidence to the roles and limitations of those who work in hectic hospitality environments.
Written Training Doesn’t Always Describe Real Practice
In the majority of investigations involving alcohol the questions revolve around the employee’s training. Does the establishment provide employee training in the area of seller-server? Did the establishment teach its employees how to recognize intoxication? Did management outline how to refuse additional service?
The answer to these questions might be in the training certificates but they’re not sufficient.
The venue may have policies implemented, but fail to follow them consistently. Employees could have followed established service guidelines even if the end result was disastrous.
A review of operations considers the information on training, employee testimony supervision by management, as well as any actions that were documented in the incident. It is essential for lawyers representing defense and plaintiffs to discern between the existence of a policy and its application.
The Timeline often provides the key questions
Imagine a customer being served drinks by a variety of bartenders in a busy evening. The bartender who was first on the scene may be observing normal behaviour. Another bartender could have served another beverage after an alteration in shift. A manager later, could have intervened.
It is possible to make these decisions appear to be one continuous action without retracing the time line. Retrospectively reviewing personnel schedules, transaction records surveillance footage, incident reports together can aid in determining who was aware of what and when. It is better to determine if there are any missing records or footage, instead of speculating.
Lawful Liability and Practices in Industry are Different Questions
Professionals in hospitality can provide explanations and judge if a facility is following recognized operating procedures.
They don’t replace the responsibility of the court to decide the legal responsibility. Dram shop laws vary between states, including the circumstances in which alcohol sellers could be subject to civil lawsuits.
Rideout Hospitality Consulting provides support for defense lawyers and plaintiffs in the United State through case reviews, operational analyses, written opinions depositions, trial testimony and other types of evidence. Its services focus on alcohol-related decisions and staff training.
The Most Proven Analysis explains what the Evidence Doesn’t Show
The severity of an alcohol-related accident cannot be a conclusive indicator of the previous circumstances.
Attorneys must understand the available records, the limits of the records and what employees were expected of them to operate under the circumstances.
A thorough hospitality analysis will separate documented actions from assumed behaviours and explain where the venue’s practices differ from the norms. The courts can then evaluate the actual events rather than relying solely on what they learnt later.