Disney says husband can’t sue over wife’s wrongful death – because he signed up to Disney+ trial (1 Viewer)

[Optimus Prime]

Disney has claimed a husband cannot sue the company over his wife’s wrongful death because he signed up for a trial of the Disney+ streaming service.

Jeffrey Piccolo is suing the entertainment giant for $50,000 (£38,900) after his wife died from a severe allergic reaction after eating at a restaurant in Disney Springs, Florida, in October 2023.

Court documents claim Tangsuan, a physician at NYU Langone Hospital, suffered a fatal allergic reaction after eating at a Disney Springs restaurant.

Eating at the Raglan Road Irish Pub & Restaurant in October with her husband and mother-in-law, Jackie Piccolo, court documents claim she told staff of her severe nut and dairy allergies multiple times, with them reassuring her they could make some of the food allergen-free.

They got confirmation that the food would be safe to eat numerous times, the lawsuit said: “When the waiter returned with [Tangsuan’s] food, some of the items did not have allergen-free flags in them and [Tangsuan] and [Piccolo] once again questioned the waiter who, once again, guaranteed the food being delivered to [Tangsuan] was allergen free.”

Shortly after finishing their meals, Piccolo went back to their hotel room while his wife and mother went shopping.

After splitting up to go into different stores with the intention of meeting up afterwards, Tangsuan collapsed on a shop floor struggling for breath, around 45 minutes after having eaten.

She self-administered an epi-pen before she was rushed to hospital, but tragically died. According to the legal suit, her death was confirmed by a medical examiner “as a result of anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system.”

The streaming giant is now arguing that the terms of use Mr Piccolo agreed to when creating his Disney account in 2019 means they have to settle any legal disputes with the company only via arbitration, meaning any dispute is overseen by a neutral third party and not a judge.

They say the man agreed to these terms when he activated a one-month free trial on the Walt Disney World app five years ago. Disney also says Mr Piccolo agreed to a similar language again when purchasing park tickets online in September 2023.

The lawyer representing the family has said this is “absurd” and “preposterous.” They say that Disney’s case “is based on the incredible argument that any person who signs up for an account, even free trials that are not extended beyond the trial period, will have forever waived the right to a jury trial”................

Disney says husband can’t sue death - because he signed up to Disney+ trial

The lawyer representing the family has said this is ‘absurd’ and ‘preposterous’

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Arathrael]

They say the man agreed to these terms when he activated a one-month free trial on the Walt Disney World app five years ago. Disney also says Mr Piccolo agreed to a similar language again when purchasing park tickets online in September 2023.

I saw this, but the bit I've bolded above seems to make the whole 'It's the Disney+ trial terms" thing somewhat redundant. And Disney seem to mainly be claiming that he can't sue them because they don't operate the restaurant ("Given that this restaurant is neither owned nor operated by Disney, we are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant."), that is, saying he doesn't have a legal dispute with them to start off with, rather than saying he does but that he agreed to go to arbitration.

But yeah, if the Disney+ terms did apply, I don't think that would hold up somehow. Certainly hope it wouldn't anyway.

 

[efil4stnias]

As a parent of a child with a Milk Allergy, Disney does do a really really good job accommodating - IN THE PARKS.

When you go to ANY restaurant that is not a "Disney" restaurant, this is the risk you run. We have found ONE bonafide "not Disney" places we will eat when there. Thats it. Rainforest Cafe. ( and honestly- if we can avoid it, we do - risk aversion is BEST PRACTICE )

At every Disney park eatery ( run by Disney ) the CHEF will come to your table to discuss what can/cant be done, how its done and confirm its done in an area free of cross-contamination possibility. Its quite reassuring - we have been to Disney w/ her over 20 times in 21 years ( she went early this year w BF without us - and my WIFE WAS AN ABSOLUTE WRECK those 5 days lol ) and we never ONCE had an issue.

We are HYPER VIGILANT when it comes to eating at restaurants - talking to waitstaff aint enough. Im sure many waitstaff are knowledgable, but that doesnt translate into the kitchen all the time. If manager or chef wont come to speak to us, we simply wont eat there.

And from the "latency" of the attack ( from time of eating then going shopping etc ) that sounds exactly like the NUT allergen- insidious in that regard.
My child luckily outgrew her peanut/tree nut allergy- Dr. El-Dar drilled into us from day 1 that THE NUT allergic reaction can set in 4-6 HRS AFTER INGESTION ( her Milk allergy will be instantaneous ) Ugh i cant tell you how many times we would eat at kids party or some place new and literally be on edge for 4-6 hrs after.

Terrible story. Just so easily avoidable if you stick to your guns. Simply cannot assume that another person that has your life in their hands, will do all thats needed to protect you from harm. UGH.

 

[St. Widge]

As a parent of a child with a Milk Allergy, Disney does do a really really good job accommodating - IN THE PARKS.

When you go to ANY restaurant that is not a "Disney" restaurant, this is the risk you run. We have found ONE bonafide "not Disney" places we will eat when there. Thats it. Rainforest Cafe. ( and honestly- if we can avoid it, we do - risk aversion is BEST PRACTICE )

At every Disney park eatery ( run by Disney ) the CHEF will come to your table to discuss what can/cant be done, how its done and confirm its done in an area free of cross-contamination possibility. Its quite reassuring - we have been to Disney w/ her over 20 times in 21 years ( she went early this year w BF without us - and my WIFE WAS AN ABSOLUTE WRECK those 5 days lol ) and we never ONCE had an issue.

We are HYPER VIGILANT when it comes to eating at restaurants - talking to waitstaff aint enough. Im sure many waitstaff are knowledgable, but that doesnt translate into the kitchen all the time. If manager or chef wont come to speak to us, we simply wont eat there.

And from the "latency" of the attack ( from time of eating then going shopping etc ) that sounds exactly like the NUT allergen- insidious in that regard.
My child luckily outgrew her peanut/tree nut allergy- Dr. El-Dar drilled into us from day 1 that THE NUT allergic reaction can set in 4-6 HRS AFTER INGESTION ( her Milk allergy will be instantaneous ) Ugh i cant tell you how many times we would eat at kids party or some place new and literally be on edge for 4-6 hrs after.

Terrible story. Just so easily avoidable if you stick to your guns. Simply cannot assume that another person that has your life in their hands, will do all thats needed to protect you from harm. UGH.

Luckily nobody in my family has a nut or a true milk allergy. But, I'm lactose intolerant and one time my wife told the waiter at a Disney restaurant that when they asked if anyone had any food allergies. It's not a big deal for me, I just avoid dairy and take lactase when I think there might be milk in something. But we got the full chef treatment that you talk about above.

I told my wife that we were never going to tell them that again because it's not life threatening for me and it caused a big scene. But, it's clear that they do take food allergies seriously at Disney. In fact, I don't even recall ever being asked about food allergies at restaurants outside of Disney and I don't just mean in Orlando. I mean in New Orleans, etc.

I honestly think I would stop eating out if I had severe food allergies.

 

[SWJJ]

As a parent of a child with a Milk Allergy, Disney does do a really really good job accommodating - IN THE PARKS.

When you go to ANY restaurant that is not a "Disney" restaurant, this is the risk you run. We have found ONE bonafide "not Disney" places we will eat when there. Thats it. Rainforest Cafe. ( and honestly- if we can avoid it, we do - risk aversion is BEST PRACTICE )

At every Disney park eatery ( run by Disney ) the CHEF will come to your table to discuss what can/cant be done, how its done and confirm its done in an area free of cross-contamination possibility. Its quite reassuring - we have been to Disney w/ her over 20 times in 21 years ( she went early this year w BF without us - and my WIFE WAS AN ABSOLUTE WRECK those 5 days lol ) and we never ONCE had an issue.

We are HYPER VIGILANT when it comes to eating at restaurants - talking to waitstaff aint enough. Im sure many waitstaff are knowledgable, but that doesnt translate into the kitchen all the time. If manager or chef wont come to speak to us, we simply wont eat there.

And from the "latency" of the attack ( from time of eating then going shopping etc ) that sounds exactly like the NUT allergen- insidious in that regard.
My child luckily outgrew her peanut/tree nut allergy- Dr. El-Dar drilled into us from day 1 that THE NUT allergic reaction can set in 4-6 HRS AFTER INGESTION ( her Milk allergy will be instantaneous ) Ugh i cant tell you how many times we would eat at kids party or some place new and literally be on edge for 4-6 hrs after.

Terrible story. Just so easily avoidable if you stick to your guns. Simply cannot assume that another person that has your life in their hands, will do all thats needed to protect you from harm. UGH.

I want to second this as a parent of a child with an anaphylactic food allergy (tree nuts.)

We are also HYPER VIGIANT when it comes to eating out. If I don't like the vibe of the staff/manager I discuss her food allergy with, I have asked to see the kitchen myself and check labels on things not made in house.

Disneyworld and actual Disney Restaurants do food allergies better than anyone. While I hate mega-corps (even and especially ones like Disney) and I think the Disney + terms of agrees thing is total crap, since this was not a "Disney" owned and run restaurant, I don't see how they should be held liable.

 

[efil4stnias]

Luckily nobody in my family has a nut or a true milk allergy. But, I'm lactose intolerant and one time my wife told the waiter at a Disney restaurant that when they asked if anyone had any food allergies. It's not a big deal for me, I just avoid dairy and take lactase when I think there might be milk in something. But we got the full chef treatment that you talk about above.

I told my wife that we were never going to tell them that again because it's not life threatening for me and it caused a big scene. But, it's clear that they do take food allergies seriously at Disney. In fact, I don't even recall ever being asked about food allergies at restaurants outside of Disney and I don't just mean in Orlando. I mean in New Orleans, etc.

I honestly think I would stop eating out if I had severe food allergies.

Wanna know how hard it was for a teenager to sit, with pride, while that "big scene" was happening?!??! lolol. IT took YEARS and maturity for her to come full circle to understand just how important this "big scene" was. !@#!@# everyone else and what they "think of you". ( ive drilled that into her since she was 8 - its now finally paying dividends lol )

Even today there is a lil hesitation every now and again - " do i want to make the chef come to table" - but she quickly gets over it and her BF is the same as me in regards to the "scene" - he has actually asked someone if they "had a problem" as they stared at them at a restaurant recently.

Its tough- you dont want to feel the eyes of dozens peering at you like some leper. But your LIFE depends on it. @#$#$ them. They dont understand and never will. And you will never see those folks again anyway.

It was HAAAAAAAAAARD managing those years until she matured into the young woman, in control of HER life, and comfortable enough in HER own skin.

Maaaan o man it was hard. lol.

AS for eating out. we dont with her. She has never had Ruths, or 527 or McDs or Taco Bell or Parkway Tavern etc etc etc etc .

Breads on Oak is HER spot. Recently friends came in town from UF/UA and both of them took her to Breads for lunch to catch up. Cant tell you how lovely a gesture that is. They know. We recently found another in Covginton downtown - but she still isnt fully comfortable like Breads. ( and we have BEGGED them to open one on NS LOL )

 

[efil4stnias]

I want to second this as a parent of a child with an anaphylactic food allergy (tree nuts.)

We are also HYPER VIGIANT when it comes to eating out. If I don't like the vibe of the staff/manager I discuss her food allergy with, I have asked to see the kitchen myself and check labels on things not made in house.

Disneyworld and actual Disney Restaurants do food allergies better than anyone. While I hate mega-corps (even and especially ones like Disney) and I think the Disney + terms of agrees thing is total crap, since this was not a "Disney" owned and run restaurant, I don't see how they should be held liable.

We were MASKING UP LOOOONG before COVID when we flew places prior to airlines going to pretzel snacks instead of peanuts. My wife would wipe down entire ROW with clorox wipes - cleanest 3 seats you will ever find on an airplane. LOL.

Now that she has no peanut allergy, SHE STILL wipes down - im like " honey, really?" and then i get side eye. lol. So i say " what about mine??!?" HA.

And hopefully yours grows out of it- tree nut, from our years meeting with Dr. El-Dar IIRC, is the easiest one to "grow out of"

 

[Optimus Prime]

I want to second this as a parent of a child with an anaphylactic food allergy (tree nuts.)

We are also HYPER VIGIANT when it comes to eating out. If I don't like the vibe of the staff/manager I discuss her food allergy with, I have asked to see the kitchen myself and check labels on things not made in house.

Disneyworld and actual Disney Restaurants do food allergies better than anyone. While I hate mega-corps (even and especially ones like Disney) and I think the Disney + terms of agrees thing is total crap, since this was not a "Disney" owned and run restaurant, I don't see how they should be held liable.

Why bring up Disney+ at all?

Just issue a statement saying that "This was a tragedy however Disney does not own or manage this restaurant and is not liable in the death in any way"

and the Disney+ clause seems odd anyway. Because you use our streaming service you can't have a jury trial no matter what Disney does

 

[efil4stnias]

Why bring up Disney+ at all?

Just issue a statement saying that "This was a tragedy however Disney does not own or manage this restaurant and is not liable in the death in any way"

and the Disney+ clause seems odd anyway. Because you use our streaming service you can't have a jury trial no matter what Disney does

i think they pointing out 2 separate instances in which he agreed to arbitration ( Disney + and Park Tickets )

only thing i can think of.

And i feel terrible for them. I do - id lose my !@$@$#@$ mind if i lost my child - but it would be double worse for me because i would blame myself ( as would my wife ) for NOT doing what we NORMALLY do in those instances.
In other words, for us, there will never be a situation where we were not to blame, because at the end of the day, we know the BEST way to combat allergic reactions is AVOIDANCE. ( thank you Dr. Sheen, Dr. El-Dar )

Thats something we live with. And now im trying to impart on her BF ( they are in serious relationship ) - its THAT important. And he has NO food allergies. So its a gradual assimilation - no more having bowl of cereal while playing Madden 2024. That kind of stuff that he took for granted all his 21 years now- gone. You cant even have a snickers bar and kiss her type stuff. Dont like it? move on. ( for the record he is fully committed )

 

[Dago]

Why bring up Disney+ at all?

Just issue a statement saying that "This was a tragedy however Disney does not own or manage this restaurant and is not liable in the death in any way"

and the Disney+ clause seems odd anyway. Because you use our streaming service you can't have a jury trial no matter what Disney does

Because lawyers

But also you have to think that this is potentially a huge lawsuit and I can't blame Disney for throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks with the judge since it appears to not be their fault

 

[St. Widge]

Why bring up Disney+ at all?

Just issue a statement saying that "This was a tragedy however Disney does not own or manage this restaurant and is not liable in the death in any way"

and the Disney+ clause seems odd anyway. Because you use our streaming service you can't have a jury trial no matter what Disney does

I don't know Florida law, but it could be that the two arbitration clauses were plead in the Answer filed by the Disney attorneys because if it's not included as an affirmative defense it is waived. It's possible it was just included because they did not want to waive the argument even if they are highly unlikely to seriously argue that the arbitration clause in the Disney+ contract is applicable in this case. Lawyers do this all the time just to reserve every right and defense possible in case something happens latter or they later discover evidence that might make it a viable defense.

Some reporter probably found the Answer in the record and wrote this article without adding, or possibly not knowing, the context of how lawyers work and why they do things.

 

[efil4stnias]

Some reporter probably found the Answer in the record and wrote this article without adding, or possibly not knowing, the context of how lawyers work and why they do things.

Oh hey, welcome to 2024.

LOLOL

 

[TenTwo]

#### Disney

 

[superchuck500]

Why bring up Disney+ at all?

Just issue a statement saying that "This was a tragedy however Disney does not own or manage this restaurant and is not liable in the death in any way"

and the Disney+ clause seems odd anyway. Because you use our streaming service you can't have a jury trial no matter what Disney does

I don't know Florida law, but it could be that the two arbitration clauses were plead in the Answer filed by the Disney attorneys because if it's not included as an affirmative defense it is waived. It's possible it was just included because they did not want to waive the argument even if they are highly unlikely to seriously argue that the arbitration clause in the Disney+ contract is applicable in this case. Lawyers do this all the time just to reserve every right and defense possible in case something happens latter or they later discover evidence that might make it a viable defense.

Some reporter probably found the Answer in the record and wrote this article without adding, or possibly not knowing, the context of how lawyers work and why they do things.

Yeah, I agree with Widge that it is more likely a general defense that Disney asserts any time the plaintiff has an agreement with Disney. Of course, it's completely absurd that it a Disney+ streaming customer would consent to arbitrate any and all claims against Disney including claims that have absolutely nothing to with the streaming service. But it could also be that Disney counsel has taken the position that if it doesn't always raise the arbitration issue, it could weaken its case when a scenario more closely related to the streaming service does arise.

Part of it is the nature of arbitration. It's not simply that the plaintiff "doesn't get a jury" - it's that the whole procedure is removed from the court's jurisdiction and sent over to arbitration. Because the language is in every streaming agreement, the company doesn't want to be seen as selectively enforcing it - if the court denies the clause applies, then fine.

Of course, it would be nice to see the actual flings. Media articles about court filings that don't include the pleadings or at least a link to the court are MADDENING. They should be kicked in the crotch each time they do it.

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

I once successfully had a small claims court case thrown out in Orleans Parish because the small print on the back of cruise ship ticket said you had to sue in NYC. Poor woman just wanted her money back after a terrible cruise (new ship with poorly trained crew, spoiled food, etc, etc). Forum selection clauses are presumptively valid under maritime law.

I felt sick to my stomach.

Some days are better than others as a lawyer.