In a significant development, Disney has decided not to pursue arbitration in a wrongful-death lawsuit concerning a tragic incident at Disney World. The lawsuit was brought forth by Jeffrey Piccolo after his wife, Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, who was severely allergic to nuts and dairy, tragically passed away last October following an allergic reaction to food reportedly deemed safe by a Disney World restaurant.
The case has garnered widespread media attention, particularly after Disney initially argued that Piccolo had waived his right to sue when he signed up for the Disney+ streaming service. This claim, however, led to a swift backlash from the public, sparking intense discussions about the ethical implications of such a loophole.
Disney also contended that Raglan Road, the Irish pub located in Disney Springs where the incident occurred, is an independently owned and operated entity. Despite this, the court could still hold Disney accountable due to its association as the property’s owner.
On Monday, Disney reversed its stance, stating that they acknowledged the agony arbitration could inflict on Piccolo, who is seeking damages exceeding $50,000. This decision cancels the initial hearing set for October 2 and paves the way for the case to be heard by a jury, where punitive damages could potentially be much higher.
This dramatic turn of events has heightened attention on corporate accountability and customer rights. What are your thoughts on Disney’s initial arbitration request? Do you believe companies should be able to enforce such agreements through unrelated services?
We invite you to share your thoughts in the comments below and join the conversation!
Source: Claire Fahy
