Disney Lawyers Trying To Dismiss Wrong Death Lawsuit Due To Disney+ Subscription Clause
Recently, Disney has been hit with a wrongful death lawful by Jeffrey Piccolo following the death of his wife, Dr Kanokporn Tangsuan, in 2023 from a severe allergic reaction after eating at the Raglan Road Irish Pub at a Disney Springs restaurant. The restaurant owners, along with Disney, have both been named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit is for $50,000, plus legal costs and states that Disney did not take enough care over her severe allergies to dairy and nuts, despite being repeatedly told about them. The lawsuit states:
“When the waiter returned with [Tangsuan’s] food, some of the items did not have allergen free flags in them and [Tangsuan] and [Piccolo] once again questioned the waiter who, once again, guaranteed the food being delivered to [Tangsuan] was allergen free,”
Soon after leaving the restaurant, Tangsuan started experiencing difficulty breathing and collapsed, then was taken to hospital. A medical examiner has confirmed that her death was “as a result of anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system.”
However, Disney lawyers are fighting the lawsuit with a clause that says that because Dr Kanokporn Tangsuan signed up on a Playstation for a free trial of Disney+ in 2019, the terms and conditions state that they agree to settle any disputes with the company via arbitration. Disney also states that Jeffrey Piccolo agreed to these terms when buying tickets through his Disney account when visiting Epcot at Walt Disney World in 2023. The Disney account states:
“any dispute between You and Us, Except for Small Claims, is subject to a class action waiver and must be resolved by individual binding arbitration.”
Due to this clause, Disney wants the lawsuit halted and for the dispute to be resolved out of court. Jeffrey Piccolo’s lawyers have called these arguments “preposterous” and “inane”. Adding that the case “is based on the incredible argument that any person who signs up for a Disney+ account, even free trials that are not extended beyond the trial period, will have forever waived the right to a jury trial”.
“The notion that terms agreed to by a consumer when creating a Disney+ free trial account would forever bar that consumer’s right to a jury trial in any dispute with any Disney affiliate or subsidiary, is so outrageously unreasonable and unfair as to shock the judicial conscience, and this court should not enforce such an agreement,”
It was also said in the lawsuit that:
“In effect, WDPR is explicitly seeking to bar its 150 million Disney+ subscribers from ever prosecuting a wrongful death case against it in front of a jury even if the case facts have nothing to with Disney+,”
The court will now have to consider whether a contract to enter a theme park or a subscription to a streaming service can cover serious issues like wrongful death. Both sides will make their case to a judge, with a court hearing for Disney’s motion scheduled for October 2nd 2024.
Disney issued a statement regarding the lawsuit:
“We are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant”
Roger’s Take: There’s little doubt that Disney wants to try to take this case out of the court system in the hope of avoiding bad publicity, but with this story now making the headlines worldwide, many might be questioning how far terms and conditions of a streaming service can apply. Ultimately, a dreadful mistake in a kitchen has cost a woman her life, and understandably, her husband wants to make sure this never happens again. But for lawyers to try to use terms and conditions from a free trial to Disney+, does seem inappropriate and completely unrelated.
What do you think of this whole situation? Let me know on social media!
Roger Palmer
Related Article
Disney+ Launches New $1.99 A Month Promotion
Disney+ To Reduce Pan-Nordic Commissioning Of Original Programming
