Disney+ waives right to arbitration in wrongful death lawsuit

Disney World bills itself as the happiest place on earth, but now the company is accused of tricking its customers into giving up their right to sue them if a crime occurs.

If no precautions are taken, the world could soon turn into a “Joan is Awful” episode of Black Mirror, where a streaming service tricks a user into giving up their private information and personal life events to broadcast a show about her life.

Related: Disney Signals Startling Change in Theme Park Consumer Behavior

In early October 2023, Long Island physician Kanokporn Tangsuan suffered a severe allergic reaction while dining at Raglan Road Irish Pub, a restaurant located in Disney Springs at Walt Disney World Resorts in Florida.

Almost 45 minutes after leaving the restaurant, Dr. Tangsuan began having a severe allergic reaction and went into anaphylactic shock. He collapsed on the floor and was injected with an EpiPen. Despite efforts, she was taken to a nearby hospital where she was pronounced dead.

Jeffrey Piccolo, Dr. Tangsuan’s husband, said his wife’s death could have been avoided; his wife had alerted the wait staff to severe food allergies to dairy and nuts. Piccolo says the waiter assured him and his wife multiple times that the food was allergy-free, but his wife was still served contaminated food.

In February 2024, Piccolo filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Orange County, Florida against The Walt Disney Company. He is seeking damages in excess of $50,000, which is the minimum litigation amount for circuit courts to hear cases in the state of Florida.

More Disney:

• Disney cast members break a controversial theme park rule
• Disney has an unexpected new theme park rival
• Show and Tell: Added to Disney

After the lawsuit was filed and a Disney attorney reviewed it, The Walt Disney Company filed a dismissal of the lawsuit on May 31.

One of Disney’s reasons for the dismissal request was that when Piccolo signed up for a Disney+ account in 2019 and purchased Walt Disney World tickets on Disney’s website, he agreed to “resolve all disputes between us through binding individual arbitration and include a class. waiver of action and waiver of jury trial.’

Section 2: Agreement to Binding Ticket Arbitration and Class Action Waiver

In arbitration, also called mediation, all legal disputes between two or more parties must be settled outside of court. An arbitrator, who is an impartial third party, legally makes the final decision. This process is usually less formal and time-consuming than going through a proper court system, and also tends to fly under the radar of the media as it would be confidential.

Piccolo’s lawyers filed a response challenging Disney’s reasoning for the firing, saying he did not know he had waived his right to sue; even if he had, it wouldn’t apply to his wife since he was the one who agreed.

In the previous motion to dismiss, Disney’s lawyers also argued that the case against Disney should be dismissed and that the company should be excluded from the suit because the restaurant itself is not owned or operated by Disney and is not located in any of Walt Disney World. Parks.

The restaurant is actually located in Disney Springs, an outdoor complex owned and operated by The Walt Disney Company, which is leased to other companies. This would be considered a landlord-tenant relationship because Disney does not personally operate the restaurant for its tenants.

TV screen with Disney logo displayed and a magnifying glass above

Shutterstock

Is Disney accused of betraying loyal customers by imposing legal agreements?

Users who wish to subscribe to streaming services often have to agree to terms and conditions set by the company providing the service. Some of these agreements often include clauses that force them to forever waive their rights to sue the companies.

However, Disney+ isn’t the only company that has imposed these hidden agreements on its customers when they purchase a subscription or free trial. Other popular streaming services such as Netflix and Hulu also have similar legally binding agreements.

There’s no law against streaming services from imposing their terms and conditions on users who want to subscribe to them, but that doesn’t mean the company can’t ever be sued. If it is brought to court, the court must interpret the arbitration clause and determine whether the defendant’s claim is valid.

Disney waives the right to arbitrate

The Walt Disney Company responded to our request for comment on Monday, August 19, confirming that the company has decided to waive its right to arbitration and stated the following:

“At Disney, we strive to put humanity above all other considerations. Given the unique circumstances of this case, we believe this situation warrants a sensitive approach to expedite a resolution for the family who has suffered such a painful loss. As such, we have decided to waive our right to arbitration and take the matter to court,” – Josh D’Amaro, President, Disney Experiences.

The move came after a torrent of social media backlash against the company after reports first emerged of its attempt to keep the matter out of court.

Related: Disney+ and Hulu subscriptions are getting more expensive

What about the restaurant?

While Raglan Road has yet to publicly respond to the lawsuit, the restaurant has updated its website menu with a message for guests with food allergies: “We cannot guarantee that any food we prepare is gluten/allergen free or cross contact”.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024