7 Questions
Qualifications & Background
Questions about Ryan Dahlstrom's credentials, experience, and professional background as an expert witness.
Ryan Dahlstrom has over 35 years of direct operational experience in the licensed hospitality industry, spanning bar management, restaurant operations, nightclub programming, hotel food and beverage, live entertainment venues, and security operations. He holds certifications in responsible alcohol service training and is ASIS (American Society for Industrial Security) certified. His expertise is grounded in having personally managed and consulted for hundreds of licensed establishments — giving him firsthand knowledge of the operational standards, training programs, and management practices that form the basis of the standard of care in dram shop and liquor liability cases. Unlike academic experts, Ryan's opinions are rooted in real-world operational experience that courts and juries find credible and accessible.
Ryan Dahlstrom holds certifications in responsible alcohol service training, including TIPS (Training for Intervention ProcedureS) and other nationally recognized alcohol server education programs. He is also ASIS (American Society for Industrial Security) certified, which provides the foundation for his opinions on premises security, negligent security, and security management standards. His certifications are supplemented by 35+ years of practical experience developing, implementing, and auditing training programs for licensed establishments across the country.
Ryan Dahlstrom works for both plaintiff and defense attorneys. His opinions are based on the facts of each individual case and the applicable standard of care — not on which side retains him. This balanced approach strengthens his credibility as an expert witness, as courts and opposing counsel cannot characterize him as a hired advocate for one side of the bar. Attorneys on both sides of dram shop, liquor liability, premises liability, and negligent security cases have retained Ryan to provide case review, expert reports, deposition testimony, and trial testimony.
Ryan Dahlstrom has been retained as an expert witness in cases across more than 50 states and jurisdictions. Dram shop statutes, liquor liability laws, and premises liability standards vary significantly from state to state, and Ryan's nationwide experience allows him to apply the correct legal framework for each jurisdiction while drawing on his operational expertise to opine on the applicable standard of care. He is available to serve as an expert witness in any state or federal jurisdiction.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom has provided deposition testimony and trial testimony in cases involving dram shop liability, liquor liability, premises liability, and negligent security. His trial experience includes testimony in both state and federal courts. In addition to his trial and deposition engagements, Ryan has been retained in 30+ additional matters by plaintiff and defense counsel nationwide — including cases involving bar security, restaurant management, premises liability, and event safety. A complete engagement list is available in his curriculum vitae, which can be downloaded from this website. He is experienced in presenting complex operational and industry-standard concepts in a clear, accessible manner for judges and juries.
Ryan Dahlstrom's operational background spans virtually every category of licensed hospitality venue. He has managed and consulted for bars and taverns, full-service restaurants, high-volume nightclubs, hotel food and beverage operations, live music venues and concert halls, sports bars, casino food and beverage, event venues, and outdoor entertainment facilities. His client portfolio includes major hotel brands, casino properties, celebrity-owned establishments, national restaurant chains, and independent operators. This breadth of operational experience is what distinguishes him from academic experts who have studied the industry but never managed it.
Ryan Dahlstrom's professional background combines formal education in hospitality management with decades of hands-on operational experience. He has developed and delivered responsible alcohol service training programs for licensed establishments, conducted operational audits and compliance reviews, and served as a consultant to attorneys, insurance companies, and hospitality operators on standards of care, policy development, and risk management. His full curriculum vitae, including his complete professional history, certifications, case engagements, and fee schedule, is available for download on this website.
Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on a broad range of civil liability cases arising from the hospitality and licensed beverage industry. These include dram shop liability (overservice of alcohol to a visibly intoxicated patron), liquor liability, premises liability (slip, trip, and fall incidents), negligent security (assaults, fights, and violent incidents on licensed premises), restaurant operations and food service liability, live music venue accidents, hotel and resort liability, casino alcohol service liability, and the adequacy of responsible alcohol service training programs. He can also opine on the standard of care for security management, crowd control, use of force by security staff, and the development and enforcement of operational policies.
A standard of care review is an analysis of whether a licensed establishment's policies, training, staffing, and operational practices met the level of care that a reasonably prudent operator in the same type of establishment would have exercised under the same or similar circumstances. In the context of a dram shop or liquor liability case, a standard of care review examines the establishment's alcohol service policies, server training records, management oversight practices, and the specific conduct of staff on the date of the incident. Ryan Dahlstrom conducts standard of care reviews by analyzing available evidence — including POS records, surveillance footage, incident reports, training documentation, and witness statements — and comparing the establishment's practices against industry standards and applicable state regulations.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on whether the available evidence — including surveillance footage, POS records showing the volume and timing of alcohol service, witness statements, and the toxicologist's report — is consistent with visible intoxication at the time of service. Importantly, Ryan's role is distinct from that of a toxicologist: he does not reconstruct blood alcohol concentration levels. Instead, he reviews the toxicologist's BAC findings and correlates them with the POS records, surveillance footage, and other available evidence to opine on whether the patron's condition should have been observable to a trained and attentive server or bartender, and whether continued service was consistent with the establishment's duty of care.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom is qualified to opine on negligent security cases arising from licensed hospitality venues, including bars, nightclubs, restaurants, hotels, casinos, live music venues, and sports bars. His ASIS certification and operational experience managing security operations at high-volume venues give him the foundation to opine on security staffing levels, training adequacy, deployment strategies, use of force protocols, crowd management, and whether the establishment's security measures were adequate given the foreseeable risk of violence at that specific venue. He can also opine on the foreseeability of criminal activity based on the venue's prior incident history and the nature of its clientele.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on premises liability cases involving slip, trip, and fall incidents at licensed hospitality venues. His opinions address the establishment's maintenance and inspection protocols, the physical conditions of the premises at the time of the incident, whether the hazard was known or should have been known to management, and whether the establishment's response to the hazard was timely and adequate. He has experience with slip and fall cases in bar and restaurant environments, hotel common areas, nightclub dance floors, pool and outdoor venue surfaces, and parking lots.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on cases and regulatory actions arising from the service or sale of alcohol to a minor. His opinions address the establishment's age verification policies and procedures, the training provided to staff on identifying minors and checking identification, management oversight of the age verification process, and whether the establishment's practices met the applicable standard of care. He can opine on both on-premise service (bars, restaurants, nightclubs) and off-premise retail sales (convenience stores, liquor stores) involving underage alcohol service.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on cases involving casino alcohol service, including the unique liability issues created by complimentary alcohol service to active gamblers. Casino alcohol service presents distinctive challenges — including 24-hour operations, complimentary service that removes the natural deterrent of cost, and large casino floors where multiple cocktail servers may be serving the same patron without coordination. Ryan can opine on whether the casino's complimentary service policies, cocktail server training, and monitoring systems were adequate to prevent overservice in this distinctive operational environment.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on cases involving hotel and resort alcohol service, including the complex liability questions that arise when a patron is served across multiple venues within the same property (lobby bar, pool bar, restaurant, room service, banquet). He can address the hotel's systems for tracking service across multiple points of sale, the adequacy of training for staff in each service environment, and the specific challenges of managing alcohol service in a 24-hour hospitality operation. He can also opine on premises liability and negligent security issues arising on hotel and resort properties.
Ryan Dahlstrom reviews surveillance footage and POS (point of sale) records as primary evidence in his case analysis. POS records provide an objective timeline of alcohol service — showing what was ordered, when, and by which server — which Ryan correlates with the toxicologist's BAC findings and the surveillance footage to build a factual picture of the patron's service history and observable condition. Surveillance footage is reviewed for evidence of visible intoxication, including gait, balance, coordination, speech, and behavior. Ryan's operational experience as a manager and trainer gives him the practical knowledge to interpret this evidence in the context of what a trained server or bartender would have observed and been required to do under the establishment's policies and applicable law.
To retain Ryan Dahlstrom as an expert witness, contact him directly by phone at (702) 696-8745 or by email at [email protected]. The initial consultation involves a brief discussion of the case facts, the venue type, the nature of the incident, and the specific opinions being sought. Ryan will conduct a preliminary conflicts check to ensure he has not previously been retained by an adverse party in the same matter. If there is no conflict, he will provide a retention agreement and fee schedule. Early retention is strongly recommended in cases with approaching discovery deadlines or expert disclosure dates.
The most useful materials to provide at the outset of an engagement include: the complaint and any operative pleadings; available surveillance footage from the incident and the hours preceding it; POS records showing the patron's alcohol service history; incident reports and police reports; the toxicologist's report and BAC findings; witness statements and deposition transcripts; the establishment's training records and policy manuals; and any prior incident reports or complaints involving the same venue. Ryan will identify any additional materials needed after reviewing the initial production. Providing complete materials early in the engagement allows for a more thorough and efficient case review.
Ryan Dahlstrom's turnaround time for an expert report depends on the complexity of the case, the volume of materials to be reviewed, and the current demand on his schedule. For straightforward cases with a complete production of materials, an initial case review and preliminary opinion can typically be provided within two to three weeks of receiving all relevant materials. A full written expert report, suitable for disclosure under applicable rules of civil procedure, generally requires four to six weeks from the completion of the materials review. Rush turnaround is available in cases with imminent expert disclosure deadlines; contact Ryan directly to discuss scheduling.
Ryan Dahlstrom's 2026 fee schedule is as follows. Case review, report preparation, consultation, and all related work is billed at $500.00 per hour. An initial nonrefundable retainer of $5,000.00 is required at the time of engagement and is billed against at $500.00 per hour; once the retainer balance reaches $1,000.00, an additional $5,000.00 retainer is required. Deposition testimony is billed at $2,500.00 for a half-day (4 hours) minimum and $5,000.00 for a full day (8 hours) maximum. Trial testimony is billed at the same rates: $2,500.00 for a half-day minimum and $5,000.00 for a full-day maximum. Cancellation of a scheduled deposition or trial within one week results in a 4-hour charge; cancellation within 48 hours results in an 8-hour charge. Deposition and trial fees must be received prior to the proceeding or it will be considered canceled. Travel time is billed at $185.00 per hour. Site visits are $3,000.00. Travel, lodging, and per diem ($150.00 per day) are billed at actual cost if pre-paid, or at actual cost plus 30% if reimbursed. The complete fee schedule is also available in Ryan's curriculum vitae, which can be downloaded from this website. Ryan does not work on a contingency basis.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom is available for cases in any state or federal jurisdiction. He has been retained as an expert witness in cases across more than 50 states and regularly travels for depositions and trial testimony. Travel expenses are billed at cost. For cases in jurisdictions with specific expert witness qualification requirements, Ryan's counsel can work with retaining counsel to ensure compliance with applicable local rules.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can provide a preliminary case evaluation based on a summary of the facts and available evidence. A preliminary evaluation allows retaining counsel to assess whether Ryan's expertise is a good fit for the specific issues in the case before committing to a full retention. Preliminary evaluations are conducted at Ryan's standard hourly rate and are subject to a conflicts check. Contact Ryan directly at (702) 696-8745 or [email protected] to schedule a preliminary evaluation.
A case review is an initial analysis of the available evidence and case facts, resulting in a verbal or written summary of Ryan's preliminary opinions and the strengths and weaknesses of the case from an expert witness perspective. A case review is often the first step in an engagement and helps retaining counsel decide how to proceed. A full expert report is a formal written document that sets forth Ryan's opinions, the basis for those opinions, and the materials reviewed — prepared in compliance with the applicable rules of civil procedure for expert witness disclosures (e.g., Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B)). A full expert report is required for expert witness disclosure in most state and federal courts.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can serve as a consulting expert — providing case analysis, strategy input, and assistance with deposition preparation — without being designated as a testifying expert. In this capacity, his work product may be protected from discovery under the attorney work product doctrine, depending on the applicable jurisdiction. Attorneys often retain Ryan as a consulting expert early in a case to assess the merits of the expert witness issues before deciding whether to designate him as a testifying expert. Contact Ryan to discuss the appropriate engagement structure for your case.
A dram shop law is a state statute that creates civil liability for licensed alcohol vendors — bars, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels, and other establishments — who serve alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person or a minor who subsequently causes injury to a third party. The term 'dram shop' derives from the historical unit of measurement for spirits. Most states have enacted some form of dram shop statute, though the specific elements of the claim, the standard of liability, and the available defenses vary significantly from state to state. In a typical dram shop case, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant served alcohol to a patron who was visibly intoxicated at the time of service, and that the patron's intoxication was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.
Dram shop liability applies to licensed commercial vendors of alcohol — bars, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels, and other establishments that sell alcohol for profit. Social host liability applies to private individuals who provide alcohol at non-commercial gatherings, such as house parties, private events, or corporate functions. The legal standards for social host liability are generally more restrictive than for commercial dram shop liability, and many states impose social host liability only in cases involving the service of alcohol to minors. Ryan Dahlstrom's expertise is primarily in commercial dram shop and liquor liability, though he can also opine on cases involving alcohol service at commercial event venues and catered functions where the line between commercial and social host liability may be at issue.
In the context of dram shop law, 'visibly intoxicated' refers to a level of intoxication that is observable to a reasonable, trained server or bartender — meaning that the patron's intoxication was apparent from their outward behavior, appearance, and conduct. Common indicators of visible intoxication include slurred speech, impaired balance and coordination, glassy or bloodshot eyes, flushed face, loud or erratic behavior, difficulty handling money or making change, and confusion or disorientation. The standard is objective — what a reasonably trained server should have observed — not what a particular server claims to have observed. Ryan Dahlstrom opines on whether the available evidence, including surveillance footage and POS records, is consistent with visible intoxication and whether a trained server exercising reasonable care should have recognized it.
Dram shop statutes vary significantly across states in several key dimensions: the standard of liability (negligence per se vs. common law negligence), the class of plaintiffs who can bring a claim (third parties only vs. the intoxicated patron themselves), the availability of comparative fault defenses, damage caps, notice requirements, and the statute of limitations. Some states have very robust dram shop statutes that create broad liability for licensed vendors, while others have more limited statutes or rely primarily on common law negligence principles. Ryan Dahlstrom's nationwide experience allows him to apply the correct legal framework for each jurisdiction while focusing his expert opinions on the operational and industry-standard dimensions of the case that are consistent across all states.
A responsible alcohol service training program — such as TIPS, ServSafe Alcohol, or a state-mandated certification program — is central to the standard of care analysis in a dram shop case. The existence (or absence) of a training program, the content of the training, the frequency with which it is provided, and whether the server involved in the incident actually completed the training are all relevant to whether the establishment met its duty of care. Ryan Dahlstrom's expertise in developing and delivering responsible alcohol service training programs gives him the standing to opine on whether the training provided was adequate, whether it addressed the specific risks presented by the establishment's operations, and whether the server's conduct on the date of the incident was consistent with what a properly trained server would have done.
The standard of care for a licensed alcohol vendor is the level of care that a reasonably prudent operator of the same type of establishment would exercise under the same or similar circumstances. This standard is informed by industry practices, applicable state regulations, the establishment's own policies and training materials, and the specific operational context of the venue. For a high-volume nightclub, the standard of care for monitoring patron intoxication may be different than for a quiet neighborhood bar — because the foreseeable risks, the volume of service, and the operational environment are different. Ryan Dahlstrom's opinions on the standard of care are grounded in his direct operational experience managing and consulting for establishments of every type, giving him the credibility to explain to a court what a reasonably prudent operator in that specific context would have done.
Negligent security is a form of premises liability that arises when a property owner or operator fails to provide adequate security measures to protect patrons, guests, or visitors from foreseeable criminal acts. In the context of a bar or nightclub, negligent security claims typically arise from assaults, fights, stabbings, or shootings that occur on or near the premises. The key elements of a negligent security claim are: (1) the establishment had a duty to provide reasonable security; (2) the criminal act was foreseeable based on the establishment's prior incident history, location, or the nature of its clientele; (3) the establishment's security measures were inadequate; and (4) the inadequate security was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries. Ryan Dahlstrom opines on all four elements from an operational and industry-standard perspective.
Ryan Dahlstrom evaluates the adequacy of a venue's security by examining multiple factors: the number and deployment of security personnel relative to the venue's capacity and the foreseeable risk of violence; the training and qualifications of security staff; the establishment's written security policies and use of force protocols; the venue's prior incident history and any patterns of violence; the physical layout of the venue and whether it created foreseeable security vulnerabilities; the presence and coverage of surveillance systems; and the establishment's coordination with local law enforcement. He compares these factors against industry standards for security management at similar venues to opine on whether the establishment's security measures were adequate given the foreseeable risks.
In negligent security cases, foreseeability refers to whether a reasonably prudent property owner or operator should have anticipated the risk of criminal activity on the premises based on the totality of the circumstances. Courts have applied different tests for foreseeability, including the prior similar incidents test (requiring evidence of prior crimes of the same type at the same location), the totality of the circumstances test (considering all relevant factors, including the nature of the business, the location, and the general crime environment), and the balancing test (weighing the foreseeability and severity of harm against the burden of implementing security measures). Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on foreseeability from an operational perspective — addressing what a reasonable security professional would have identified as foreseeable risks at that specific venue.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on whether the force used by security staff in removing or restraining a patron was proportionate to the threat presented and consistent with applicable industry standards and the establishment's own use of force policies. His opinions address the security staff's training in de-escalation techniques, the availability of less-forceful alternatives, the specific circumstances that led to the use of force, and whether the establishment's management protocols required supervisory oversight of security decisions. He can also opine on whether the establishment's hiring, training, and supervision of security staff met the applicable standard of care.
Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on a broad range of premises liability cases arising at licensed hospitality venues, including: slip, trip, and fall incidents caused by wet floors, spilled beverages, inadequate lighting, uneven surfaces, or other hazardous conditions; injuries from inadequate maintenance of physical structures (stages, barriers, elevated platforms, furniture); injuries in parking lots and common areas; injuries caused by overcrowding or inadequate crowd management; and injuries from physical altercations between patrons where the establishment's security response was inadequate. His opinions address the establishment's maintenance and inspection protocols, whether the hazard was known or should have been known to management, and whether the establishment's response was timely and adequate.
ASIS International (formerly the American Society for Industrial Security) is the leading professional organization for security management professionals. ASIS certifications — including the Certified Protection Professional (CPP) and Physical Security Professional (PSP) designations — are widely recognized as the industry standard for security management expertise. Ryan Dahlstrom's ASIS certification provides the professional foundation for his opinions on security management standards, security staffing and training adequacy, use of force protocols, and the industry-standard practices for managing security risk at licensed hospitality venues. Courts have consistently recognized ASIS-certified experts as qualified to opine on security management standards in negligent security cases.
Nightclub dram shop cases present unique challenges because of the operational environment — high-volume alcohol service from multiple simultaneous points of sale (bartenders, cocktail servers, VIP hosts), loud environments that impair communication and observation, low lighting that makes it harder to assess patron condition, and the social normalization of heavy drinking in nightlife settings. These factors create both greater overservice risk and greater difficulty in monitoring patron intoxication. Ryan Dahlstrom's experience managing high-volume nightclub operations gives him the credibility to explain these operational dynamics to a court and to opine on whether the nightclub's systems for monitoring service across multiple points of sale were adequate to prevent overservice.
Live music venues and concert halls present a distinctive liability profile that combines bar and nightclub alcohol service liability with the crowd management challenges of a large public assembly. Key liability issues include: alcohol service policies for events (including concession stand service, bar service, and VIP area service); crowd management and crowd surge injuries; negligent security for events with foreseeable violence risk; the allocation of liability between the venue, the promoter, and the touring act; and the adequacy of the venue's security plan for specific events. Ryan Dahlstrom's experience programming and managing live entertainment events — including major shows at high-capacity venues — gives him the operational credibility to opine on all of these issues.
Restaurant alcohol service liability differs from bar liability in several important respects. First, many states apply different legal standards to restaurant alcohol service, recognizing that food service is the primary purpose of the establishment and that the presence of food may affect the rate of alcohol absorption. Second, the operational environment of a restaurant — where servers are managing food service, beverage service, and multiple tables simultaneously — creates different monitoring challenges than a bar where staff can focus primarily on drink service. Third, the social context of dining may make it harder for servers to recognize visible intoxication in patrons who are engaged in conversation and eating. Ryan Dahlstrom's experience in both bar and restaurant operations allows him to address these distinctions and opine on the specific standard of care applicable to restaurant alcohol service.
Hotel and resort alcohol service cases present unique liability questions because of the multi-venue nature of the property. A single guest may be served alcohol at the lobby bar, the pool bar, the restaurant, and through room service — each by different staff with no coordination or tracking of the guest's total consumption. This creates both greater overservice risk and more complex liability questions about which venue's service was the proximate cause of the incident. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on the hotel's systems (or lack thereof) for tracking service across multiple venues, the adequacy of training for staff in each service environment, and how liability should be allocated among the different service points within the property.
Yes. Ryan Dahlstrom can opine on cases involving golf course and country club alcohol service, including the unique liability issues created by beverage cart service on the golf course, where staff may be serving the same golfer multiple times over the course of a round without any coordination or tracking of total consumption. He can also opine on golf cart accident cases where alcohol service was a contributing factor, clubhouse bar and restaurant service, and member-to-member incident liability. The private club environment creates distinctive operational dynamics — including long-standing service relationships with members and social pressure to continue serving known members — that Ryan can address from an operational perspective.
1 / 6