Disney Trying To Move A Wrongful Death Suit Into Arbitration Based On Terms And Agreements Of Widowed Plaintiff’s Disney Plus Subscription
Disney Corp. wants a lawsuit thrown out on a weird, and one would think unprecedented, basis. What’s more, the suit is not of a frivolous nature as it involves the death of a patron at one of their parks and her widower.
Per The New York Post, theme park-goer Jeffrey Piccolo claims his wife Kanokporn Tangsuan, an NYU doctor, “suffered a fatal allergic reaction shortly after eating at a Disney Springs restaurant in Florida last October.”
In his original complaint, it states 42-year-old Tangsuan “died of a severe allergic reaction known as anaphylaxis just hours after dining at the Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant with her husband back on Oct. 5,” after repeatedly stressing to the staff she was deathly allergic to nuts and dairy.
Piccolo is seeking $50,000 in damages, but instead of settling, defendant Disney is using terms of service against him. They say because the widower’s Disney Plus subscription stipulates all disputes with the company must be arbitrated – which entails proceedings outside a courtroom.
Their court documents add this defense was in effect as of 2019 when Piccolo signed up for a one-month trial. A motion filed in a circuit court last May contends “the Disney+ subscriber agreement Piccolo signed years earlier on his PlayStation called for any dispute – with the exception of small claims – to be ‘resolved by individual binding arbitration.’”
The company is likewise hiding behind “similar language” present in the agreement written into the My Disney Experience app which Piccolo used to buy tickets for the trip and a visit to Epcot. His attorney’s responded that Disney’s justifications are “preposterous,” “outrageously unreasonable,“ and “fatally flawed.”
“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,” they wrote in a motion earlier this month.
They also counter that the suit was filed on behalf of the estate of Kanokporn Tangsuan “and not on behalf of himself.” Piccolo is seeking the damages under Florida’s wrongful death act, for mental pain and suffering, loss of income, and funeral expenses.
Kanokporn Tangsuan suffered anaphylactic shock after she and her husband dined at the Raglan Road Pub. She had trouble breathing and eventually collapsed before being taken to a local hospital, where she succumbed. An emergency epi-pen injection was administered but had no effect.
More About:TV Shows
Read This Next
