Haupt v. Fiesta Hotel and Casino
Premises LiabilityEvent Security
Case Review · Expert Report · Deposition
Outcome: Settled
Case experience: Premises Liability · Event Security · Security Operations · Hospitality
Serving Plaintiff & Defense Attorneys Nationwide
(702) 696-8745Home / Expert Witness by State / Nevada
Nevada · No dram shop cause of action
Ryan Dahlstrom accepts expert-witness engagements in Nevada and is retained by attorneys representing plaintiffs and defendants. Nevada matters involving licensed venues commonly proceed on premises liability and security, and Ryan evaluates security staffing, supervision, crowd management and incident response.
Alcohol Service
Nevada does not recognize a dram shop claim against a licensee
NRS 41.1305 treats the consumption of alcohol, not its service, as the proximate cause of injury. The practical effect is broad immunity: a person injured by an intoxicated patron generally has no dram shop cause of action against the licensed establishment that served them.
The immunity is unusually wide. It is not limited to service to adults — NRS 41.1305(3) extends protection to licensed businesses and their employees. The exposure the statute does create runs to social hosts who knowingly serve alcohol to a person under 21, not to licensees.
This matters for case selection. An alcohol-related injury at a Nevada bar, nightclub, casino or resort is litigated as premises liability or negligent security — inadequate security staffing, failure to intervene, use of force by security personnel, crowd management, foreseeable violence, or the condition of the premises.
This summary is general information for counsel, not legal advice. Statutes, regulations and case law change; counsel should confirm the law in effect on the date of loss. Ryan Dahlstrom's opinions address operational practices measured against hospitality industry standards; he does not offer opinions on the law.
Evidence
The evidence set follows the legal standard. Where the statute turns on what was observable, the analysis runs on video, service records and staffing; where it turns on security or premises conditions, it runs on deployment, supervision and incident history.
Selected Engagements
Ryan was retained by GGRM Law Firm for the plaintiff in Haupt v. Fiesta Hotel and Casino, District Court, Clark County (A-18-776379-C), on premises liability and event security. Case review, expert report and deposition; the matter settled.
Premises LiabilityEvent Security
Case Review · Expert Report · Deposition
Outcome: Settled
Case experience: Premises Liability · Event Security · Security Operations · Hospitality
Questions
Other Jurisdictions
Ryan Dahlstrom accepts expert-witness engagements in all 50 states.
Submit a case inquiry for a confidential conflicts check and evaluation. Ryan responds to case inquiries within one business day.