In a shocking legal maneuver, Disney Parks and Resorts is trying to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by a grief-stricken husband by citing the terms and conditions of his subscription to Disney Plus. The case focuses on the tragic death of Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, a 42-year-old doctor from New York who died in February after suffering an extreme allergic reaction at a restaurant in Disney World.
Doctor Consumed Nuts and Dairy in Disney World
Earlier this year, Jeffrey J Piccolo, Dr. Tangsuan’s husband, filed a lawsuit that accuses Disney’s Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant in Orlando, Florida, of serving food containing allergens to her despite having been told many times about her severe nut and dairy allergy. The suit claimed that the restaurant staff “assured” that no allergens were present in the meal she ate.
Unfortunately, just 45 minutes after eating the meal, the deceased had difficulties breathing and collapsed while shopping. She later passed away in the hospital, having been pronounced dead by the cause of “anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system” by the medical examiner.
Disney’s Standpoint
Disney has come under criticism for its position on this matter, which it has put forward through its legal team. Despite expressing condolences to the bereaved family, Disney insists that Piccolo should not be allowed to sue for wrongful death.
This is because he agreed to settle any disputes relating to his relationship with it via arbitration upon joining Disney Plus as one of their subscribers back in 2019. The streaming service consumer agreement includes a clause requiring all dispute matters, including class action waiver, to be handled through arbitration.
Consequences for Disney
Piccolo's lawyers have strongly condemned Disney's insistence on invoking clauses from its subscriber agreement with those who subscribe to its streaming services. The lawyers described Disney’s submission as “ridiculous” and shocking because it does not bear any relevance to the death of Dr. Tangsuan.
They also state that there is no way that 150 million subscribers to Disney Plus could have relinquished their right to take legal action against Disney or its affiliates in all respects, mainly unrelated to their streaming service.
Legal Implications and How it Affects Consumers
"There is simply no reading of the Disney+ Subscriber Agreement which would support the notion that Mr Piccolo agreed to arbitrate claims arising from injuries sustained by his wife at a restaurant located on premises owned by a Disney theme park or resort which ultimately led to her death," Picollo's attorneys said, according to NBC New York.
Disney's strategy has sparked broader debates about what small print in user agreements means and if businesses are going too far in trying to exonerate themselves from liability. Many are keeping a close watch on the court’s reaction to the case as they await an answer regarding whether or not one can use a streaming subscription services agreement as a shied-away reason for wrongful deaths.
The lawsuit calls for $50,000 in damage compensations; however, this remains a contentious issue, with both sides preparing themselves for litigation that has significant implications on consumer rights and corporate responsibility.
