Disney claims streaming arbitration clause binding in resort wrongful death suit

Disney is seeking to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by Jeffrey Piccolo, whose wife, Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, died from an allergic reaction at a Disney World restaurant. Piccolo claims that the restaurant staff assured them that her meal would be allergen-free, but she suffered a severe reaction and died shortly after dining. The lawsuit alleges negligence and seeks damages exceeding $50,000. Disney argues that the case should be dismissed based on the terms of use agreed to by Piccolo when he signed up for a Disney+ free trial, which includes an arbitration clause for disputes. Piccolo's lawyers counter that this argument is unreasonable, suggesting that agreeing to Disney+ terms does not waive rights related to personal injury or wrongful death claims. They assert that Piccolo agreed to the terms only for himself, not on behalf of his wife or her estate. Legal experts have expressed skepticism about Disney's position, indicating that it could set a concerning precedent for consumer rights. A hearing is scheduled for October 2, 2024.

- Disney seeks dismissal of a wrongful death lawsuit linked to an allergic reaction at a restaurant.

- The lawsuit claims negligence by restaurant staff regarding allergen-free assurances.

- Disney argues that terms of use from Disney+ include an arbitration clause for disputes.

- Piccolo's lawyers contest that the terms do not apply to wrongful death claims.

- Legal experts warn that ruling in favor of Disney could negatively impact consumer rights.