Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is facing a legal battle that delves into the complex realm of terms of service agreements. The entertainment giant is trying to move a wrongful death lawsuit filed by Jeffrey Piccolo, who tragically lost his wife, Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, to an allergic reaction at Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant in Disney Springs, from court to arbitration. Disney’s basis for this request? The assertion that Piccolo waived his right to a court trial when he agreed to the terms of services for a Disney+ trial and Epcot tickets, which included an arbitration clause.
The incident that sparked this lawsuit occurred on October 5, 2023, when Dr. Tangsuan, a New York University physician, suffered a fatal allergic reaction after dining at the pub. Despite being assured by staff that the food was free from allergens, the unfortunate event led to her passing just two days before the couple’s planned visit to Epcot. Piccolo promptly filed a suit against Disney and the pub’s operators in October 2024, seeking damages exceeding $50,000.
Disney’s attorneys argue that the terms of the Disney+ subscription and Epcot ticket purchases, which Piccolo agreed to, included a comprehensive agreement to arbitrate any disputes with the corporation. Consequently, the company hopes to have the lawsuit dismissed from court in favor of arbitration. They emphasize that these terms cover disputes arising from various legal grounds, including those involving affiliates like Walt Disney Parks and Resorts.
However, Piccolo’s legal representation is pushing back strongly. Brian R. Denney of Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, PA, argues that Disney’s stance is “unconscionable and unenforceable.” Denney contends that it’s unreasonable to believe that Piccolo, by agreeing to terms for a Disney+ account, was also agreeing on behalf of his late wife to arbitrate disputes related to an incident at a Disney property pub.
In response to the ongoing legal motions, the Raglan Road menu has since added an allergen disclaimer, emphasizing the restaurant’s efforts to mitigate cross-contact but noting the impossibility of guaranteeing allergen-free dishes entirely. Disney has yet to comment on the case, and a court hearing is scheduled for October 2, 2024, to address the motion to compel arbitration.
We invite our readers to share their thoughts on this legal battle. Do you believe that terms of service agreements should extend to incidents involving family members? Join the discussion in the comments below and share your perspective!
Source: Thomas Claburn
