Wrongful Death at Disney - Can Disney+ Get Lawsuit Thrown Out
Wrongful Death at Disney - Can Disney+ Get Lawsuit Thrown Out?
- Abraham & Charlet Sanieoff
As a result of a doctor experiencing a severe allergic reaction at a Disney World restaurant, Disney is attempting to have her widower's wrongful death case dismissed by referring to the tiny language of a Disney+ trial that he signed up for years earlier.
Jeffrey Piccolo is acting as the legal representative for the estate of his late wife, Kanokporn Tangsuan, who was a physician at the NYU Langone hospital in New York. Kanokporn Tangsuan passed away in October due to an allergic response that she had to the Florida resort.
Raglan Road Irish Pub is a restaurant that is situated inside a retail and eating complex known as Disney Springs. On the evening of October 5th, the couple, together with Piccolo's mother, proceeded to have supper at the restaurant.
According to the complaint filed in a Florida circuit court, Tangsuan was "highly allergic" to dairy and nuts, and they selected that specific restaurant in part due to its claims about accommodating customers with dietary restrictions.
The family's several discussions on Tangsuan's allergies with their server are described in detail in the lawsuit. Claim: The family brought up the matter at the outset, asked whether certain menu items were safe, had the waiter clarify with the chef that they could be made allergy-free, and then asked "several more times" for confirmation.
"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," the complaint states.
After eating, the three of them parted ways, with Piccolo taking the leftovers to their room and his mother and wife going to the shops. About 45 minutes later, Tangsuan "began having severe difficulty breathing and collapsed to the floor."
She self-administered an epi-pen, and an observer called 911. The Piccolos, who had tried calling her multiple times, were eventually told she had been rushed to the hospital. They went to meet her and, after a period of waiting, were told that she had died.
"The medical examiner's investigation determined that Tangsuan's cause of death was as a result of anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system," according to the lawsuit.
Piccolo filed suit in February against Raglan Road Irish Pub and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S. Inc. (WDPR), accusing both companies of negligence for preparing Tangsuan's food improperly and for failing to train their employees to guarantee food was made allergen-free as requested.
Disney claims that because Piccolo opened a streaming account, the dispute ought to be resolved extrajudicially.
NPR's request for comment has not received a response from Disney Parks or its attorney. But they have responded with legal files.
Disney's attorneys submitted a move at the end of May requesting that Piccolo be ordered to arbitrate the dispute privately, rather than in public, between them and an impartial third party, and to put a halt to the legal processes while this is happening.
Disney officially said in court records that the "main benefit of arbitration is avoiding heavy litigation costs." Arbitration is typically seen to be a more effective and economical means of settling disputes than litigation.
Users who want to register an account must agree to the terms of use, which provide that "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."
When Piccolo bought park tickets online in September 2023, according to Disney, he consented to the same terms once again. Furthermore, it states that it is "immaterial" whether he ever really read the tiny print.
"Piccolo ignores that he previously created a Disney account and agreed to arbitrate 'all disputes' against 'The Walt Disney Company or its affiliates' arising 'in contract, tort, warranty, statute, regulation, or other legal or equitable basis,'" The motion states that the wording is sufficiently inclusive to address Piccolo's assertions.
Disney's demands are deemed "outrageously unreasonable" by Piccolo's legal team.
Disney's reasoning was criticized by Piccolo's attorneys in an early August response, calling it "preposterous," "bordering on the surreal," and "fatally flawed for numerous independent reasons."
"According to the 123-page filing, it is clear that there is no interpretation of the Disney+ Subscriber Agreement that would indicate Mr. Piccolo's agreement to resolve legal disputes through arbitration in relation to the injuries his wife suffered at a restaurant owned by a Disney theme park or resort, which ultimately resulted in her death," stated the filing.
It has been verified that he really established a Disney+ account on his PlayStation in 2019. However, he maintains that he terminated the membership during the trial period since he has not identified any further costs related to it.
Piccolo's legal representatives said that the corporation was attempting to deny Tangsuan's estate the opportunity to have a trial by jury.
"The argument made is that the agreement made by a consumer when signing up for a Disney+ free trial account, which prevents the consumer from having the right to a jury trial in any dispute with any Disney affiliate or subsidiary, is extremely unreasonable and unfair to the point that it is morally unacceptable. Therefore, the court should not uphold such an agreement," they stated.
Piccolo's legal representatives also objected to the procedure itself, contending that Disney failed to assert its purported entitlement to arbitration at an early stage of the proceedings.
Additionally, it is said that Piccolo did not initiate the action as an individual, but rather on behalf of Tangsuan's estate, which did not provide consent to any of these conditions. At that time, there did not exist any estate since Tangsuan was still living.
Not surprisingly since there is no one authority in Florida that would support such an inane claim, "[Disney] does not explain how Mr. Piccolo individually bound an Estate that did not exist," they stated.
They said, the arbitration clause might create issues for more than just their own client.
"In essence, 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+," they said.
Very soon, both parties will have the opportunity to present their arguments in front of a court. It has been decided that the court will hold a hearing on Disney's application on October 2nd.
SHARE POST:
Abraham Sanieoff
We work with you to create experiences that people will never forget. From websites to billboards, t-shirts to bus stops, and everything in between.
Leave A Comment
FOLLOW US
RECENT POSTS
COMMENTS
CATEGORIES
ABRAHAM SANIEOFF
We work with you to create experiences that people will never forget. From websites to billboards, t-shirts to bus stops, and everything in between.
RECENT POSTS
NEWS LETTER
We work with you to create experiences that people will never forget. From websites to billboards, t-shirts to bus stops, and everything in between.