A truly curious and complex situation is brewing in the magical world of Disney. The company may prevent a grieving husband from suing Walt Disney Parks and Resorts for wrongful death due to a surprising clause in the Disney+ terms of service. Jeffery Piccolo, whose wife Kanokporn Tangsuan tragically passed away, argues Disney’s bold legal stance “shock[s] the judicial conscience.”
Kanokporn Tangsuan, a New York doctor, died from anaphylaxis in October 2023 after dining at Raglan Road, an Irish pub at Disney Springs in Orlando. Despite notifying the server multiple times of her allergies, Tangsuan suffered a fatal allergic reaction attributed to undisclosed dairy and nut presence in her meal. Piccolo, seeking over $50,000 in damages, is now up against a claim that his wife’s death was not Disney’s responsibility but that of the eatery, which Disney says it does not own or operate.
Disney’s argument hinges on a standard clause in their Disney+ terms of service. When Piccolo signed up for a trial in 2019, he agreed to an arbitration clause that allegedly encompasses all disputes with Disney and its affiliates, including those unrelated to streaming services. Disney’s attorneys further assert a similar arbitration agreement was made when Piccolo purchased Epcot Center tickets online.
Despite Disney expressing sympathies for the family’s loss, lawyer Brian Denney describes Disney’s position as “absurd” and “inane.” Denney stated in court documents that it’s surreal to think a Disney+ trial subscription could waive someone’s right to a jury trial in perpetuity—especially in such severe cases as wrongful death.
What do you think of Disney’s legal strategy? Do you find it as shocking and surreal as the plaintiff’s lawyer suggests, or is it a standard corporate defense? Share your thoughts in the comments and engage with our Disney community!
Source: AS USA
