A receipt from a restaurant shows that the customer drank several alcohol-based drinks. The next day the same person is in a serious crash. Receipts are crucial for attorneys investigating potential dram shops liability. But it doesn’t automatically establish whether the establishment served an intoxicated customer or if the employees failed to follow the correct procedures. What transpired between the drink orders could be more clear.

To fully comprehend this sequence it is necessary to examine the hospitality aspect of alcohol as an operation, not only counting beverages after an event.

A Receipt is a proof of sale and does not reflect the condition of the buyer.

Point-of-sale records can establish the date and time of transactions, what beverages were purchased, as well as what charges were assigned to the tab.

A receipt cannot reveal what the client’s behavior was when they were served a drink. The receipt will not disclose the drinkers who consumed it when drinks were served in a shared manner, and the manner in which the bartender viewed it.

An expert witness can assist attorneys with the interpretation of these documents with regard to surveillance footage and employee statements. It is crucial to decipher the order of service, without assuming every purchase will tell the whole story.

What do employees really observe?

The most important issue in disputes over alcohol-related service is whether staff have reasonable grounds to believe that the person was drunk. These could be evidence of impairment in coordination, abnormal speech and a difficulty in maintaining equilibrium or any noticeable changes in behavior.

These indicators need context. A single incident in surveillance footage could be a cause that is not related to alcohol. Investigators must also look at the camera’s angle, the quality of recording the position of the employee, as well as if a particular behavior was visible to staff.

Preston Rideout brings experience as a bartender, bar manager, nightclub general manager, and director of bar operations to these evaluations. His operational background helps connect documented evidence to the responsibilities and limitations of staff who work in busy hospitality settings.

Written Training Doesn’t Always Describe Real Practice

In all alcohol-related investigation, questions are asked about the preparation of the employee. Does the establishment offer seller-server training to its employees? Did the establishment educate employees to spot signs of intoxication? Did management discuss ways to deny additional service?

The answers to these questions could be in the certificates of training, but they are not enough.

A venue might maintain detailed policies, but fail to consistently implement them. On the other hand, employees may follow established practices in service regardless of the outcome was tragic.

An operational review takes into account information on training materials as well as employee testimony. Also, it considers the oversight of management as well as any actions that are documented during the incident. Both defense and plaintiff attorneys can benefit from a distinction between the presence of the policy and its actual execution.

The Timeline often provides the key questions

Consider a client who is served by multiple bartenders the same time in a busy time. The first employee may have observed a common behavior. Following a shift change, another bartender might have served a different drink. Later, a manager may have intervened.

In the absence of a timeline to reconstruct the decisions could seem to be one continuous act of service. Looking over documents of transactions, staffing plans, surveillance footage, and incident reports all together will aid in determining who was aware of what and when. Missing footage or incomplete records are also to be noted rather than rewritten with speculation.

The issues of liability under the law and practice in the industry are distinct.

Hospitality professionals are able to describe the accepted operating procedures of a restaurant and establish whether its behavior is in accordance with these standards.

They do not substitute for the power of a court to decide the legal responsibilities. Dram shop laws vary between states, including the circumstances in which alcohol sellers could be liable for civil actions.

Rideout Hospitality Consulting assists plaintiff and defendant attorneys across the country with reviews of cases, analyses of operations, writing opinions, and depositions. Its services include alcohol-related decisions, staff training managing practices, as well as any other relevant hospitality operations.

The strongest analysis accounts for What the Evidence Cannot Show

Alcohol-related events can have serious consequences, however their severity is not determined by all the evidence.

Lawyers must be able to recognize the documents available, and the limits they have, as well as how employees would have been expected to act in the particular circumstances.

An exhaustive analysis of hospitality practices will separate documented actions from the assumed behavior and identify where the venue’s practices are aligned or deviated from established standards. This distinction can help courts assess the events that actually occurred instead of relying only on what was revealed in the aftermath.