Disney World says man can't sue over wife's death because of free Disney+ trial

[TaylorSwift 162,475]

Disney World is arguing that it cannot be sued over the death of a woman at their resort because her husband agreed to the terms and conditions of a Disney+ free trial five years ago.

Kanok**** Tangsuan died from an allergic reaction to a meal at a Disney Springs restaurant in Florida in 2023. Jeffrey Piccolo filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the entertainment giants after claiming she "repeatedly" informed staff at the theme park of her severe allergies to dairy and nuts. The doctor was confirmed dead at hospital hours later.

Disney have now claimed its terms of use, which Mr Piccolo agreed to when he created his streaming account in 2019, means they have to settle out of court. 

 

[weed 78,959]

Saw that on Twitter earlier, so ridiculous of Disney to play that card. While I can see them threatening hard enough to get the settlement they want I hope they lose hard.

At a minimum I hope the PR hurts them. More awareness about Terms and Conditions as well.. what the f*ck kind of terms and conditions for a streaming service = if you die from an allergic reaction by our mistake you cannot sue.

Rest in Peace to her, complete negligence and unprofessionalism on their part.

[HelloHangoverz 17,452]

Capitalism strikes again

[ALGAYDO 35,134]

That’s literally insane 

[tyler k 5,330]

evil

[KennyRichie 2,111]

That’s not very Disney from them 

[Elohim 1,961]

What the actually fck?

Now I have to read disney+ terms and conditions to find out what are they gonna use as defense.

edit: ok wow just read the full thing, this is crazy lmfao

[The Fame 4,288]

Eh...Disney can say this all they want, but a judge can absolutely allow this to go to a jury trial.

[River 127,528]

I think it's fake maybe? there are so many misinformation here

1. Disney Springs is not a park but a big open air shopping and dining area, free of charge, everyone can go there, so what's even the connection to the free trial of D+? even if you bought a ticket to the parks, Disney Springs is still free and not part of the package.

2. If she died at the restaurant.. sue the restaurant, not Disney, they are only renting the place.

[Plastic Flower 5,586]

What in South Park is this? 

[bionic 50,111]

27 minutes ago, River said:

I think it's fake maybe? there are so many misinformation here

1. Disney Springs is not a park but a big open air shopping and dining area, free of charge, everyone can go there, so what's even the connection to the free trial of D+? even if you bought a ticket to the parks, Disney Springs is still free and not part of the package.

2. If she died at the restaurant.. sue the restaurant, not Disney, they are only renting the place.

They are suing the Restaurant whose staff "guaranteed" the food would be allergen-free.

Disney are being sued too because 'it has control over the restaurants and policies at Disney Springs' (I assume the failure on Disney's part being in relation to processes relating to allergen training and disclosure).

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/26/business/new-york-doctor-dies-at-disney-world-restaurant-after-staff-confirmed-food-was-allergen-free-lawsuit-alleges/index.html

As well as the Disney+ trial, Disney are also saying that the arbitration clause applies because they once bought Epcot tickets lmao

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/14/business/disney-plus-wrongful-death-lawsuit/index.html

 

[River 127,528]

1 minute ago, bionic said:

They are suing the Restaurant whose staff "guaranteed" the food would be allergen-free.

Disney are being sued too because 'it has control over the restaurants and policies at Disney Springs'.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/26/business/new-york-doctor-dies-at-disney-world-restaurant-after-staff-confirmed-food-was-allergen-free-lawsuit-alleges/index.html

As well as the Disney+ trial, Disney are also saying that the arbitration clause applies because they once bought Epcot tickets lmao

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/14/business/disney-plus-wrongful-death-lawsuit/index.html

 

from how I see it, it's a shitty lawyer trying to find an excuse to win and not really "Disney says".

But still, I think it's bold to sue Disney over this, it's the restaurant's fault, especially when it's not part of the parks, inside the parks? sure, but Disney Springs is just a mall, just sue the business and file a regular complaint to Disney.

[Killa 18,827]

Yeah the Disney lawsuit must be some Freddy lawyer that sound a way tò catch big fish and the bucks. The staff thought..i understand the stress of a restaurant and its Easy for everything to go wrong but its completely Heart breaking. 

[bionic 50,111]

13 minutes ago, River said:

from how I see it, it's a shitty lawyer trying to find an excuse to win and not really "Disney says".

But still, I think it's bold to sue Disney over this, it's the restaurant's fault, especially when it's not part of the parks, inside the parks? sure, but Disney Springs is just a mall, just sue the business and file a regular complaint to Disney.

I agree bringing Disney into it is probably unfounded but I guess they've just been advised to sue everyone potentially liable to cover all bases and let the chips fall where they may– and on the restaurant's end probably relates to landlord liability insurance too.

In any case, arguing 'you trialled our streaming service 6 years before the incident occurred so you can never sue us for anything' is a ridiculous defence to even try and test in court lmao

 

[RochesterJoannster 4,043]

1 hour ago, Plastic Flower said:

What in South Park is this? 

It’s certainly the type of headlines that a South Park episode would feature!