Disney is seeking to have a widower’s wrongful death lawsuit dismissed and resolved by individual arbitration due to the terms the man agreed to when he signed up for a Disney+ account years ago. Jeffrey J. Piccolo filed a lawsuit against Disney Parks and Resorts after his wife, Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, died from a severe allergic reaction at a restaurant in Disney World. Despite repeatedly asking about whether her allergies could be accommodated, Tangsuan had a reaction after eating and died at a local hospital. Disney argues that the lawsuit should be dismissed and resolved through arbitration because Piccolo agreed to these terms when he signed up for a free trial of Disney+ and purchased tickets through the Walt Disney Parks website.
The terms and conditions of Disney+ state that any dispute between the user and Disney, except for small claims, must be resolved through individual arbitration and is subject to a class action waiver. Piccolo’s lawyers slammed Disney’s reasoning for seeking dismissal as “preposterous” and argued that the terms agreed to when creating a Disney+ free trial account should not bar a consumer’s right to a jury trial in any dispute. Piccolo’s attorneys asked the court to not enforce arbitration and accused the Florida resort and restaurant of negligence in Tangsuan’s death, saying that despite informing the server of her severe allergies, they were assured the food would be allergy-free which ultimately led to her death.
Tangsuan’s severe allergic reaction occurred after eating at Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant where the family repeatedly asked about the food’s allergen content. Despite assurances from the server, Tangsuan began having trouble breathing, collapsed, and was brought to the hospital where she later died. An autopsy report cited in the complaint revealed that Tangsuan died from anaphylaxis with elevated levels of nut and dairy in her system, with her death being ruled an accident. Piccolo’s lawyers argued that the terms agreed to in the Disney+ subscriber agreement should not prevent Piccolo from seeking a jury trial in this case, and that the notion of barring a consumer’s right to a jury trial based on agreeing to terms during a free trial sign-up is unreasonable and unfair.
Disney has not responded to requests for comment on the case, and Piccolo’s lawyers also refuted Disney’s arguments for seeking a dismissal. They maintain that the terms agreed to by Piccolo when creating a Disney+ free trial account should not prevent him from seeking a jury trial in a case involving the death of his wife at a Disney theme park. The case raises questions about the enforceability of arbitration clauses in consumer agreements, particularly in cases involving serious injury or death. It remains to be seen how the court will rule on the issue and if Piccolo will be allowed to pursue his lawsuit against Disney Parks and Resorts for negligence in his wife’s death.
