Disney argues that a wrongful death lawsuit should be settled outside of court due to its streaming service’s terms of use. Image source: berkielynn, via Wikimedia Commons
Disney has challenged a wrongful death lawsuit by arguing that signing up for its streaming service, Disney+, includes waiving the right to sue the company.
Kanokpom Tangsguan, a 42-year-old New York doctor, was visiting Walt Disney World in October 2023 with her husband Jeffrey Piccolo.
Piccolo, who filed the lawsuit, states that Tangsguan had eaten at the Raglan Road Irish Pub in Disney Springs, an outdoor shopping, dining, and entertainment complex that is part of the Disney World theme park.
Tangsguan ordered the vegan fritter, scallops, onion rings, and a vegan shepherd’s pie at the restaurant. Piccolo states that he informed the waitstaff about Tangsguan’s severe allergies to nuts and dairy products, and that she would require “allergen-free food”.
According to the lawsuit, the server Piccolo informed of his wife’s allergies had “guaranteed” the food was allergen-free. However, some items did not have “allergen-free flags”.
Tangsguan later died in hospital from an allergic reaction despite self-administering an EpiPen. A medical examiner confirmed her death was due to “anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system”.
Piccolo alleges Disney is at fault and is seeking over $75,525 in damages.
Disney has argued that Piccolo cannot sue and must instead settle any lawsuits outside of court with the company through an arbitration process. The company claims this is because Piccolo signed up for a one-month free trial of Disney+ in 2019.
The company outlined in its motion that “the Terms of Use, which were provided with the Subscriber Agreement, include a binding arbitration clause”.
“The first page of the Subscriber Agreement states, in all capital letters, that ‘Any dispute between You and Us, Except for Small Claims, is subject to a class action waiver and must be resolved by individual binding arbitration.’”
Brian Dennery, Piccolo’s lawyer, filed a response that argued that it was “absurd” to believe that Disney+ subscribers, numbering over 150 million, had waived their rights to sue the company.
Dennery further argued that the case had nothing to do with the streaming platform and that the courts “should not enforce such an agreement”.
“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”.
Disney argued that the service terms made this “immaterial”, that the arbitration condition “covers ‘all disputes’ including ‘disputes involving The Walt Disney Company or its affiliates’”, and that they were “deeply saddened” about the family’s loss.
Disney defends that they do not operate or own Raglan Road Irish Pub, only the park it is located in, and they are defending “against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include them in their lawsuit against the restaurant”.
A hearing is scheduled for 2 October, where the county court in Orlando, Florida, will hear Disney’s motion in the case.
