Disney Pushes Back on Wrongful Death Lawsuit

Disney is attempting to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit by invoking a Disney+ subscription agreement, sparking controversy and legal debate.

At a Glance

Disney seeks to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a doctor who died from an allergic reaction at Disney Springs.
The company argues that the plaintiff agreed to arbitration when signing up for Disney+.
The lawsuit claims the restaurant served food containing allergens despite assurances of allergen-free options.
Plaintiff’s lawyer argues against Disney’s stance.

Disney’s Legal Maneuver

Disney is attempting to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit by citing the terms of service agreed to when signing up for its streaming service, Disney+. The case revolves around the tragic death of Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, a 42-year-old New York physician who suffered a fatal allergic reaction after dining at Raglan Road Irish Pub in Disney Springs, Florida. Disney also asserted in a statement that the dining place involved is not owned by the company.

Jeffrey Piccolo, Tangsuan’s husband, filed a lawsuit seeking more than $50,000 in damages. Disney, however, argues that Piccolo cannot sue because he agreed to settle all disputes through arbitration when he signed up for a Disney+ trial in 2019.

The Tragic Incident

The lawsuit alleges that despite informing the server of severe allergies and receiving assurances of allergen-free options, Dr. Tangsuan was served food that triggered a fatal allergic reaction. The medical examiner determined the cause of death to be anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nuts.

The family chose Raglan Road because it was advertised as having allergen-free food on Disney’s website. Despite this, the tragedy unfolded, leading to the current legal battle.

Disney’s Defense and Legal Arguments

Disney’s legal team is basing their argument on the arbitration clause in the Disney+ Subscriber Agreement. They maintain that whether Piccolo reviewed the service terms is irrelevant and that the arbitration provision covers all disputes involving Disney or its affiliates.

“The Terms of Use, which were provided with the Subscriber Agreement, include a binding arbitration clause,” Disney said. “The first page of the Subscriber Agreement states, in all capital letters, 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.'”

Disney argues wrongful death suit should be tossed because plaintiff signed up for a Disney+ trial https://t.co/NDvmVfIIpR

— The Associated Press (@AP) August 15, 2024

Disney has expressed condolences for the family’s loss but also said that the Irish pub is not owned or operated by Disney. The company stated, “We are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant.”

Response

The case has sparked widespread discussion among legal experts and the public. Critics have argued that it’s unreasonable to expect consumers to forfeit their right to sue over unrelated matters simply by subscribing to a streaming service.

“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,” Brian Denney, Piccolo’s attorney, wrote.

An October 2 hearing is scheduled to address Disney’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit.