This browser does not support the Video element.
Disney+ terms cause legal battle
The Walt Disney Company is asking a Florida court to throw out a widower's wrongful death suit after his wife suffered a fatal allergy attack at a Disney Springs restaurant due to fine print on the Disney+ app.
NEW YORK - Disney is no longer asking a Florida court to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit on the grounds that the victim’s family had signed up for its streaming service Disney+.
The company filed a notice in Orange County court on Tuesday to withdraw the motion, which had drawn swift backlash when it became public.
Josh D’Amaro, chairperson of Disney's theme park division, said in a statement emailed earlier to The Associated Press that the entertainment giant will waive its arbitration rights and allow the suit, brought by the husband of a New York doctor who suffered a fatal allergic reaction after eating at a restaurant in Disney Springs, to proceed in court.
"At Disney, we strive to put humanity above all other considerations," he said in the Monday night statement. "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."
Disney had previously argued that Jeffrey Piccolo could not sue the company because he agreed to settle any lawsuits against the company out of court when he signed up for a one-month trial subscription to Disney+ in 2019.
Piccolo’s lawyers didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment Tuesday.
A Disney+ streaming service sign is pictured at the D23 Expo, billed as the "largest Disney fan event in the world," on Aug. 23, 2019 at the Anaheim Convention Center in Anaheim, California. (Photo credit: ROBYN BECK/AFP via Getty Images)
In a response filed this month, they argued that it was "absurd" to believe that the more than 150 million subscribers to Disney+ have waived all rights to sue the company and its affiliates in perpetuity because of language "buried" in the fine print.
The company, in its bid to have the lawsuit dismissed, argued Piccolo had not agreed just to the arbitration terms in his Disney+ trial, but also again when he signed up for an account on Disney’s website and app in order to purchase the couple’s tickets for their ill-fated theme park visit.
Both sides had been slated to make their case before a judge in Orlando on Oct. 2.
Arbitration allows people to settle disputes without going to court and generally involves a neutral arbitrator who reviews arguments and evidence before making a binding decision, or award.
Disney, in a follow-up statement to The Associated Press last week, said that it was merely defending itself against Piccolo’s attempt to include the company in his lawsuit against Raglan Road, the Irish pub in Disney Springs where the family dined.
Spokespersons for the restaurant didn't immediately respond to an email seeking comment Tuesday. Disney Springs is owned by Disney, which leases some of the spaces in the outdoor dining, shopping and entertainment complex to other companies.
Piccolo’s lawsuit claims the family had decided to eat at Raglan Road in October because it was billed on Disney’s website as having "allergen free food."
Piccolo’s wife, Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, a physician with NYU Langone’s office in Carle Place, New York, had a severe allergy to nuts and dairy products, and the waiter had assured them her food was prepared without allergens, the lawsuit states.
But less than an hour after finishing their dinner, Tangsuan had difficulty breathing, collapsed and died at a hospital, despite self-administering an EpiPen, according to the lawsuit.
The medical examiner determined she died as a result of "anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system," the lawsuit states.