Disney has withdrawn its arbitration request in a wrongful-death lawsuit involving a woman who died from a severe allergic reaction at a Disney World restaurant. The decision came after public backlash over Disney’s attempt to enforce an arbitration clause in a streaming television terms of service agreement.
The lawsuit was filed by Jeffrey Piccolo on behalf of his wife’s estate. Kanokporn Tangsuan, a family medicine specialist, died from a severe allergic reaction after eating at a restaurant at Disney World in October. The lawsuit claims that Dr. Tangsuan had informed their server that she was allergic to nuts and dairy, but was assured that the dishes she ordered were allergen-free.
Initially, Disney argued that Piccolo had agreed to arbitration when he signed up for a free trial of Disney+, thereby forfeiting his right to sue. However, this legal stance was met with criticism, with many highlighting the dubious nature of tying a wrongful death claim to a streaming service agreement.
Despite the criticism, Disney’s lawyers maintained that Raglan Road, the restaurant where the incident occurred, was independently owned and operated, suggesting that the company bore no direct responsibility for the incident.
Disney has since withdrawn its arbitration request, allowing the case to proceed to a jury trial. According to Josh D’Amaro, Chairman of Disney Parks, the company believes that this situation warrants a sensitive approach to expedite a resolution for the family.
The case has sparked a broader conversation about the prevalence of arbitration clauses in service agreements and the risks they pose in corporate negligence cases. Legal experts have noted that it is rare for a company to withdraw a request for arbitration, suggesting that public perception may have influenced Disney’s decision.