Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of FloridaJurisdiction: FederalCase Name: Broberg v. Carnival Corp.Citation: 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98479
The defendant retained a dram shop expert witness. The expert opined that the defendant met or exceeded industry standards of alcohol service. However, the plaintiff argued that the court should exclude the expert’s testimony under the Daubert standard.
Facts
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit, both as the administrator of his deceased wife’s estate and individually, against the defendant. The lawsuit resulted from the death of the victim, who was a passenger on one of the defendant’s cruise ships. According to the claims, a heavily intoxicated deceased climbed onto one of the cruise ship’s outer lounge chairs. The deceased then leaned on the edge of the vessel and fell overboard.
In his lawsuit, the plaintiff charged one count of neglect under the Death on the High Seas Act on the grounds of the defendant’s superfluous supply of alcohol. The plaintiff also claimed the defendant failed to identify and report the deceased’s fall overboard. Furthermore, the plaintiff asserted that the defendant failed to launch a timely search and rescue operation. He also pled one charge of intentional emotional distress infliction.
The defendant sought to present a dram shop expert report. The expert testified that the defendant’s liquor service met or exceeded the prevalent industry standards. The plaintiff then filed a Daubert motion to exclude the expert testimony.
The Defendant’s Dram Shop Expert Witness
The dram shop expert witness had over 25 years of experience in the hospitality and liquor industry. She had worked as a CEO of a liquor wholesale operation and as a restaurant manager. The expert had also worked as a liquor permittee of federal and state licenses. Additionally, she had conducted responsible serving training programs for over 23,000 servers. The expert received her B.S. in Biology and B.A. in Education. She then completed an MBA Program for alcohol studies. She also served as an adjunct professor teaching bar and beverage management.
The defendant retained the expert to offer testimony as a dram shop expert witness in this case. The purpose of the expert’s testimony was to establish that the defendant met or exceeded industry standards of alcohol service. The dram shop expert report assessed whether the defendant delivered the appropriate liquor server instruction to its service staff. Furthermore, the report assessed whether the procedures and policies provided for the safe serving of alcohol were in accordance with the industry-wide standard of care for responsible alcohol service.
Discussion
In response to the court’s questions at the hearing, the plaintiff’s lawyer argued that he would not offer argument or evidence that:
- The defendant did not provide proper liquor server training for his service staff
- The defendant’s procedure and policies had not provided for safe beverage service
- The defendant’s procedures and policies did not fall within the responsible alcohol service standards followed in the industry
In reply, the defense counsel admitted that, in the absence of any such evidence or argument, there was no need to call the expert to the stand. As such, the defendants acknowledged that there was a lack of helpfulness of this expert. The court thus concluded that the expert’s testimony would not assist the trier of fact and therefore was inadmissible.
Ruling
The court granted the plaintiff’s motion to exclude dram shop expert witness’s testimony.
Key Takeaways for Experts
It’s important that your specialized knowledge assists the trier of fact. Experts should understand the Daubert standard to ensure the expert’s evidence is relevant. In this case, the plaintiff wanted to exclude the expert’s testimony under the Daubert standard. Your testimony should cover why your specialized expertise is needed to understand a complex topic. By doing so, the opposing counsel will have a harder time arguing that your knowledge was unnecessary.
About the author
Zach Barreto
Zach Barreto is a distinguished professional in the legal industry, currently serving as the Senior Vice President of Research at the Expert Institute. With a deep understanding of a broad range of legal practice areas, Zach's expertise encompasses personal injury, medical malpractice, mass torts, defective products, and many other sectors. His skills are particularly evident in handling complex litigation matters, including high-profile cases like the Opioids litigation, NFL Concussion Litigation, California Wildfires, 3M earplugs, Elmiron, Transvaginal Mesh, NFL Concussion Litigation, Roundup, Camp Lejeune, Hernia Mesh, IVC filters, Paraquat, Paragard, Talcum Powder, Zantac, and many others.
Under his leadership, the Expert Institute’s research team has expanded impressively from a single member to a robust team of 100 professionals over the last decade. This growth reflects his ability to navigate the intricate and demanding landscape of legal research and expert recruitment effectively. Zach has been instrumental in working on nationally significant litigation matters, including cases involving pharmaceuticals, medical devices, toxic chemical exposure, and wrongful death, among others.
At the Expert Institute, Zach is responsible for managing all aspects of the research department and developing strategic institutional relationships. He plays a key role in equipping attorneys for success through expert consulting, case management, strategic research, and expert due diligence provided by the Institute’s cloud-based legal services platform, Expert iQ.
Educationally, Zach holds a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and European History from Vanderbilt University.
