Lawyers acting on behalf of Disney made an argument to absolve themselves of a wrongful death jury trial based on the fact that the claimant had signed up for a Disney+ free trial.
The legal position faced a global backlash, and had customers checking the fine print of their subscription agreement, before Disney’s partial walk back on Monday.
Circumstances of Death
The victim, Kanokporn Tangsuan, had been eating at a Disney Springs restaurant, in October 2023, before she had an allergic reaction to the food while out shopping.
This happened despite her repeatedly asking whether the food contained nuts or dairy before she ordered her meal.
Medical Report
The meal Tangsuan had eaten had in fact contained both nuts and dairy, as revealed by later investigation.
In her husband’s lawsuit, it is written that the medical examiner determined her death to have been caused by “anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system.”
Wrongful Death
The death had prompted Jeffrey Piccolo, the victim’s husband, to sue Disney in a wrongful death suit based on their involvement in the incident.
Recently, during legal proceedings, Disney had argued that the course be taken out of court due to the terms of a free trial of Disney+ Piccolo had taken several years ago.
Capital Letter Terms
The terms of the subscription service indicate that disputes between signatories and Disney must go through arbitration, rather than a jury-based trial.
Disney’s lawyers argument was: “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.'”
Lawyer Shock
Piccolo’s lawyer, Brian Denney was shocked by the motion, and countered in terms expressing his outrage at the legal position his counterparts had taken.
Denny called it “absurd,” and referred to the terms of the Disney+ agreement as “so outrageously unreasonable and unfair.”
Global Backlash
As news of Disney’s behavior spread, there was shock around the world as the story tapped into fears of corporate control over our lives and even deaths.
Disney finally abandoned the position on Monday, discarding the request for the case to be held out of court, but this did not represent a full walk back.
Statement From Disney Leadership
The Disney Experiences Chairman, Josh D’Amaro, claimed, in a statement, that Disney try to “put humanity above all other considerations.”
“With such unique circumstances as the ones in this case, we believe this situation warrants a sensitive approach to expedite a resolution for the family who have experienced such a painful loss,” he continued.
Contracts Remain Untouched
Crucially, however, the contracts under which the terms exist have not been altered by Disney, although they agreed not to use the relevant passage in this case.
Denney pointed out that, were another complainant to face a similar position, they may come up against a similar legal hurdle from Disney lawyers.
Importance of Juries
Denney also expressed his displeasure with the mega-corporation’s actions, but also his faith in the country’s jury-driven legal system.
Denney said, to CNN: “Attempts by corporations like Disney to avoid jury trials should be looked at with skepticism,” and that jury trials were the “bedrock of our judicial system.”
