Subscription to a free one-month trial of Disney+ is the reason a man cannot sue after his wife suffered an allergic reaction and died after eating at Disney World resort in Florida, the company’s lawyers have argued. Disney said the man signed away his right to take action against the company when he agreed to the terms and conditions of Disney+ during a free trial of the streaming service several years ago.
Jeffrey Piccolo filed a “wrongful death” lawsuit against Disney after his wife Kanokporn Tangsuan, a doctor from New York, died last year. Mr Piccolo has claimed in his lawsuit that his wife died after suffering an allergic reaction from her meal at a resort restaurant in Disney Springs at the Walt Disney World Resort in Florida.
Mr Piccolo said his wife had a severe allergy to dairy and nuts and the couple questioned the restaurant waiter numerous times about the ingredients of the meal they ordered. He said they were reassured that their food would be “allergen free”.
After their meal, he claimed his wife suffered a “severe acute allergic reaction” and died later that day.
After autopsy, the cause of her death was determined as anaphylaxis — a flood of chemicals that can cause the body to go into shock — due to high levels of dairy and nuts in her system.
In his lawsuit against Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, he argued that the waiter was negligent and demanded damages over $50,000.
Disney, on the other hand, argued that the case should be dismissed and settled out of court because Mr Piccolo had agreed to the company’s terms of use when he signed up for a one-month free trial of Disney+ in 2019 and in 2023. Disney says the terms state that users of Disney’s service agree to settle any disputes with the company out of court via arbitration.
“When you create a Disney+ or ESPN+ account, you also agree to the Walt Disney Company’s Terms of Use, which govern your use of other Disney Services. The services include sites, software, applications, content, product and services, which include the Disney Parks and Resorts website,” it said.
Disney has argued that these terms of use include a clause that applies to “all disputes” including those involving “The Walt Disney Company or its affiliates” of which Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is a part.
