A receipt from a restaurant shows that a customer ordered several alcohol-based drinks. Hours later, that customer is involved in a fatal traffic accident. An attorney examining potential dram shop liability the receipt can be used as evidence. The receipt doesn’t necessarily prove that the restaurant served a clearly intoxicated customer or that the employees failed to adhere to the proper procedure. What transpired between the drink orders might be more important.
Understanding the order of events requires an examination of the alcohol service as a real hospitality service, not just taking note of the number of drinks consumed after an incident.
A receipt is a document of a sale, but it is not a condition for the purchaser.
Records at the point of sale will reveal the date and time transactions occurred, what beverages have been purchased and the charges applied to a bill.
A receipt, however, generally does not reveal how a person was behaving when drinking was offered. The receipt will not disclose the person who consumed each drink, if drinks were shared, and how the bartender was observing.
A professional witness can aid attorneys in interpreting these documents in conjunction with video surveillance and employee statements. It is important to reconstruct the sequence of service without thinking that every purchase will be the whole story.
What are the things employees can observe in reality?
One of the most crucial issues in alcohol-service disputes is whether staff had reason to suspect a patron was intoxicated. Some of the signs that could be relevant are speech or coordination issues, difficulties maintaining balance or shifts in behavior.
But these indicators still need context. Just a single moment captured in surveillance footage may have a reason that isn’t related to alcohol. Investigators should also consider the camera’s angle, quality of the recording the position of the employee, as well as whether a specific behavior was visible to staff.
Preston Rideout’s experience as a seasoned bartender and bar manager as well as general manager of the nightclub, and director of bar operations is reflected in these evaluations. His experience in operations helps link documentation with the obligations and practical limitations of employees working in busy hospitality environments.
Written Training Doesn’t Always Describe Real Practice
Most alcohol-service investigations involve questions about employee preparation. Did the establishment provide server-seller instruction? Did the establishment educate employees to detect signs of intoxication? Has management explained to employees the process for refusing extra service?
These questions are central to Responsible alcohol service, but reviewing training certificates alone may not answer them.
The venue may have policies in place, but fails to follow them consistently. On the other hand, employees may have followed recognized service practices even if the end result was devastating.
An examination of the operational aspects includes the training materials, testimonies of employees, management oversight and incidents that are documented. It is essential for plaintiffs’ and defense counsel to differentiate between the existence of a policy and its implementation.
Timeline can help answer important questions
Take a look at a client served by several bartenders the same time in the course of a busy evening. The first employee might have seen a typical behavior. A second bartender may serve a different drink following an alteration in shift. A manager might have intervened.
These decisions may appear as unending service, in the event that the timeline is not reconstitued. By examining all the relevant information including transaction logs and schedules of staffing, as well surveillance footage and an incident report together can help clarify who was in charge and when. It’s better to pinpoint any missing footage or uncomplete reports than relying on speculation.
Lawful Liability and Practices in Industry are two different issues
Hospitality experts can provide an explanation of accepted operating guidelines and judge if the actions of a hotel were in accordance with these practices.
The court is still the duty of determining liability for legal reasons. The laws that govern alcohol stores differ from state to state as do the conditions under which they may be sued.
Rideout Hospitality Consulting provides support to plaintiffs and defense attorneys in the United States through review of cases, operational analysis, written opinions trials, depositions and other forms of evidence. The work of the company focuses on alcohol-related decision-making, staff training, management techniques, and other related hospitality operations.
The strongest analysis accounts for what the Evidence Doesn’t Show
Alcohol-related incidents can have serious consequences, however their severity cannot be determined based on all the facts.
The attorney must be aware of the records available along with their limitations, as well as the expectations for employees in the conditions.
A thorough analysis of hospitality can distinguish documented actions from accepted behavior patterns and clarify how the practices of the establishment differ from established standards. This distinction can help courts assess what actually happened instead of relying only on what became known following the fact.