Serving Plaintiff & Defense Attorneys Nationwide
(702) 696-8745Expert Witness Services
Ryan Dahlstrom brings 35+ years of hands-on hospitality operations experience to dram shop litigation. He has opined on alcohol service liability cases in jurisdictions across the United States for both plaintiff and defense counsel.
35+
Years in Hospitality Operations
50+
States — Nationwide Availability
P & D
Plaintiff & Defense Retained
100+
Cases Reviewed
Dram shop liability refers to the civil legal responsibility of a licensed alcohol vendor — a bar, restaurant, nightclub, casino, hotel, or event venue — for injuries caused by a patron to whom the establishment served alcohol when that patron was visibly intoxicated or a minor. Most states have codified dram shop liability through statute, while others recognize it under common law negligence principles.
These cases turn on a central factual question: did the establishment's employees know or should have known that the patron was visibly intoxicated at the time of service, and did they continue to serve alcohol anyway? Answering that question requires deep operational knowledge of how bars and restaurants actually function — the training staff receive, the policies they are expected to follow, how POS systems record sales, and what behavioral indicators of intoxication look like in a busy service environment.
Ryan Dahlstrom has spent more than 35 years managing, consulting for, and training staff at bars, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels, and entertainment venues. He has personally trained thousands of servers and bartenders in responsible alcohol service and holds certifications from the leading responsible beverage service programs in the country. That operational depth is what separates his opinions from those of experts who have only studied alcohol service from the outside.
Whether the licensee violated its duty of care under the applicable state dram shop statute
Whether the establishment's alcohol service policies and training met the applicable standard of care
Whether visible intoxication signs were present and should have been recognized by staff
Whether the sale or service of alcohol was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries
Whether management oversight, staffing levels, and supervision were adequate
Whether POS records, surveillance footage, and witness accounts are consistent with the claimed service history
Whether the establishment's response to the incident met industry standards
Whether prior incidents at the venue created a foreseeable risk that was not addressed
Complete review of all case materials — pleadings, discovery, depositions
Analysis of POS / alcohol sales records correlated with service timeline
Review of surveillance footage for behavioral indicators of intoxication
Evaluation of staff training records, TIPS/TABC certifications, and policy manuals
Correlation of toxicologist's BAC findings with documented service history
Site inspection of the venue (when available and appropriate)
Comprehensive written expert report suitable for Rule 26 disclosure
Availability for deposition and trial testimony in any jurisdiction
Ryan has opined on dram shop cases under the statutes of numerous states. Below are examples of the legal frameworks he regularly works within. He is available in all 50 states.
| State | Citation | Key Provision |
|---|---|---|
| Nevada | NRS 41.1305 | Dram shop liability for serving visibly intoxicated persons |
| California | Bus. & Prof. Code § 25602 | Social host and commercial vendor liability |
| Texas | Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 2.02 | Dram Shop Act — provider liability |
| Florida | Fla. Stat. § 768.125 | Liability for serving minors or habitually addicted persons |
| Illinois | 235 ILCS 5/6-21 | Dramshop Act — civil liability for alcohol service |
| All States | Common Law | Negligence per se and general duty of care standards |
Holds TIPS, TABC, and other responsible beverage service certifications. Has personally trained thousands of servers and bartenders.
Security and premises safety certification adds credibility to opinions involving venue security and patron management.
Works for both sides. Opinions are grounded in the facts of each case, not the desired outcome of the retaining party.
Has provided deposition and trial testimony in multiple jurisdictions. Experienced at communicating complex operational standards to juries.
Opinions are grounded in industry standards, regulatory requirements, and documented operational practices — built to withstand Daubert challenges.
Available for case review, deposition, and trial testimony in all 50 states. Based in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Ready to Retain?
Contact Ryan today for a confidential case evaluation. He works with plaintiff and defense attorneys across all 50 states and responds to all inquiries within one business day.