Disney's culpable homicide lawsuit puts Disney+ terms in the spotlight

The Walt Disney Co. is seeking to dismiss a widower's wrongful death lawsuit on the grounds that the widower agreed to settle all disputes with the entertainment giant and its subsidiaries out of court when he signed up for a free trial of the Disney+ streaming service.

In February, Jeffrey Piccolo sued Walt Disney Parks and Resorts over the death of his wife at a restaurant at Walt Disney World.

His wife, Kanokporn Tangsuan, who was allergic to nuts and dairy products, was dining at the Raglan Road Irish Pub in the Disney Springs shopping, dining and entertainment complex in Florida. Tangsuan, a New York doctor, suffered a severe allergic reaction and died.

In a lawsuit, lawyers for Walt Disney Parks and Resorts said the matter should be referred to an outside arbitrator because when Piccolo signed up for a Disney+ account in 2019 and when he purchased tickets for EPCOT on the Disney website in 2023, he agreed to arbitrate any disputes against the company.

Piccolo's lawyers countered that he never signed an agreement with Walt Disney Parks. Even if he had, the terms would not apply to his wife, they said.

“We are deeply saddened by the family's loss and understand their grief. Because this restaurant is neither owned nor operated by Disney, we are simply defending ourselves against the plaintiff's attorney's attempt to include us in his lawsuit against the restaurant,” Disney said in a statement.

The Raglan Road Irish Pub at the resort did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In court documents, Disney described its relationship with the restaurant as a landlord.

Are consumers unknowingly waiving their legal rights when they sign up to a streaming service? Quite possible.

“Unfortunately, Disney may have a very valid argument here,” said Christine Bartholomew, a law professor at the University of Buffalo. “The Supreme Court has consistently held these arbitration clauses to be binding. It doesn't matter if they're written in tiny print in the terms and conditions.”

Every day we blindly click “I agree” when we sign up for a service or buy tickets. But what's in the fine print can cause harm.

“As it stands now, a mandatory arbitration clause in the terms and conditions of the sale or service can bind the parties,” Bartholomew said. “Even if the consumer has not read the terms. Even if the consumer has not understood the consequences.”

Including mandatory arbitration clauses in contracts is a common legal tactic to avoid class action lawsuits and large damages awards.

Companies say they ensure that arbitration is fair to consumers and argue that it is also faster and less expensive. But critics say the secretive process puts consumers at a massive disadvantage and very few people pursue a dispute through the arbitration system.

The Disney+ Subscriber Agreement states that it applies to all disputes involving Walt Disney Co. or its subsidiaries, with two exceptions.

“Almost no one reads these contracts, but the courts enforce them anyway,” said Jeff Sovern, a law professor at the University of Maryland.

While these contracts do not give up all of their rights, consumers do give up many, including the constitutional right to a jury trial and a day in court, Sovern said.

“Congress has restricted the use of arbitration clauses in some transactions, but not enough, in my view,” he said.

According to the wrongful death lawsuit, Tangsuan and Piccolo chose the restaurant because it advertised its allergy-friendly nature.

When the waiter was told that Tangsuan suffered from severe milk and nut allergies, she was “unequivocally assured” that the food was allergen-free, the lawsuit states.

When the orders for broccoli corn fritters, scallops and onion rings arrived, there were no allergen-free labels, so Piccolo and Tangsuan asked again if the food was allergen-free and were told that Tangsuan could eat the dishes without any concerns.

About 45 minutes later, Tangsuan suffered a severe allergic reaction while shopping at a nearby store. She administered an EpiPen but began to have difficulty breathing and collapsed. She was taken to the hospital, where she later died.

The coroner concluded that her death was due to anaphylactic shock “due to increased amounts of dairy products and nuts in her body.”

Disney restaurants have strict food allergy protocols and are known for their allergen management.

Lawmakers have proposed fixes to give consumers more power. Some states have tried to address the problem. A rule proposed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that would have allowed consumers to file class action lawsuits in disputes with banks, credit card companies and other financial service providers was rejected in 2017.

At the time, Wells Fargo was facing a huge scandal over millions of unauthorized customer accounts. Richard Cordray, then director of the CFPB, said the outcome preserved “a two-tiered justice system.”

David Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University and former director of the Federal Trade Commission's Bureau of Consumer Protection, doubts that Disney's terms of service are applicable in this case, but said mandatory arbitration remains “a huge thorn in the side of consumers.”

“The CFPB was close to passing a rule that would have protected consumers, but Congress thwarted their plans,” he said.

The agency received a mandate from the U.S. Congress to address mandatory arbitration, Vladeck said, and “people like me have been pushing the CFPB to adopt a new rule to protect consumers.”

““Most companies in the United States require mandatory arbitration and can, by and large, deny themselves a lot of legal recourse,” he said. “Companies love that, but individuals who are harmed by those companies don't have access to a forum that would provide them with redress, and that's a real problem.”

How can consumers avoid this dilemma? Bartholomew says they have limited options.

“The Supreme Court's position is: If you don't like it, don't sign it,” she said.

But that's hardly realistic advice, she says, which is why she encourages consumers to lobby lawmakers for change.

Disney's culpable homicide lawsuit puts Disney+ terms in the spotlight

You may also like...

Recent Posts

Disney's culpable homicide lawsuit puts Disney+ terms in the spotlight

You may also like...

Jose Altuve takes off soccer shoe to protest decision in Astros-Padres game – NBC 7 San Diego

Adorable! DDG and his son Halo get into their first “fight” | News

Insights into field hockey's frustrating battle for popularity and an unfortunate Mets decision

Recent Posts