close
close

Disney wants to transfer wrongful death lawsuit to Disney+

A man whose wife died of an allergic reaction after eating at an Irish pub at Walt Disney World Resort is responding to the company's argument that his wrongful death lawsuit should be settled out of court because he agreed to terms when he signed up for a free trial of Disney+ in 2019.

Lawyers for New York doctor Jeffrey Piccolo in his lawsuit against Walt Disney Parks and Resort and Great Irish Pubs, which operates the Raglan Road Irish Pub, called the company's reasoning “absurd” in a 123-page response filed earlier this month. In May, the entertainment giant had asked to have the case transferred from a district court in Orange County, Florida, to a private, outside arbitrator.

Court documents filed by Piccolo's attorneys said his wife, 42-year-old Kanokporn Tangsuan, also a doctor, has a severe milk and nut allergy. In October, the couple dined with Piccolo's mother at Raglan Road Irish Pub while visiting Disney Springs, a shopping complex at Disney World, because the restaurant advertised its ability to accommodate guests with allergies.

The Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant at Disney Springs website states: “Guests may consult with a chef or a Cast Member trained in special diets before ordering.”

“We make reasonable efforts in the sourcing, preparation and handling of our products to avoid introducing the allergens mentioned into allergy-friendly menus,” the website continues.

Lawyers for Disney and Great Irish Pubs did not immediately respond to HuffPost's request for comment.

A sign is seen near one of the entrances to Disney Springs in Lake Buena Vista, Florida on May 18, 2020.

According to Piccolo's lawsuit, the couple had asked their waiter to confirm if certain menu items could be made without dairy or nuts, and the waiter said yes. They confirmed several times that the food Tangsuan ordered was allergen-free, and each time the waiter assured them the food was allergen-free, the lawsuit states.

However, about 45 minutes after her meal, while shopping alone at Planet Hollywood, Tangsuan suffered a sudden, severe allergic reaction, Piccolo's lawyers said. When her mother-in-law tried to reach her by phone, an unidentified person answered and told her Tangsuan had been taken to the hospital, the lawsuit says.

According to Piccolo's lawyers, someone at Planet Hollywood called 911 after Tangsuan administered an EpiPen and collapsed to the ground gasping for air. The lawsuit states Piccolo and his mother rushed to the hospital, where they found Tangsuan had died. A medical examiner later determined her cause of death was anaphylactic shock due to elevated amounts of dairy and nuts in her body, according to the lawsuit.

In February, Piccolo filed a wrongful death lawsuit, seeking more than $50,000 in damages and a jury trial.

Disney responded three months later, claiming that as a Disney+ subscriber, Piccolo had agreed to terms of service that bind him to an arbitration clause. The company said anyone who signs up for Disney+ or ESPN+ agrees to terms that specify they will use arbitration to resolve “all disputes.”

Disney said Piccolo agreed to similar language when purchasing Disney World tickets online through My Disney in September 2023 and that “it is also irrelevant whether Piccolo actually reviewed the Disney terms.”

In their response to Disney's motion, Piccolo's lawyers argued that the arbitration agreements were “buried in certain terms and conditions” and called the company's claim that Piccolo was not involved in a matter involving his wife's estate – which did not exist at the time the agreements were signed because she was still alive – “somehow absurd.”

“There is simply nothing in the Disney+ subscription agreement that would support the notion that Mr. Piccolo agreed to settle claims related to injuries sustained by his wife at a restaurant on the property of a Disney theme park or resort, which ultimately led to her death,” Piccolo's lawyers wrote.

Piccolo's lawyers added that Disney's arbitration agreement could pose a threat to the nearly 150 million other Disney+ subscribers who may seek a lawsuit unrelated to the streaming service.