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

[superchuck500]

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.

At least there, the claim arose directly from the transaction and exchange that contained the forum selection clause.

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

At least there, the claim arose directly from the transaction and exchange that contained the forum selection clause.

Yep.

This story seems like the plaintiffs trying to hook in a very deep pocket and Disney doing whatever they can to distance themselves from the restaurant.

 

[St. Widge]

Yep.

This story seems like the plaintiffs trying to hook in a very deep pocket and Disney doing whatever they can to distance themselves from the restaurant.

I could see Disney arguing that it's not their restaurant so they aren't responsible and then if the Plaintiff tries to claim they are responsible because Disney Springs is their property, Disney says if that's the case then the arbitration clause in the tickets you bought for the trip applies and you have to go to arbitration. I can't think of any way to apply the Disney Plus arbitration clause but I could see the argument for the clause in the tickets applying if the tickets were bought for the trip during which the woman died. Probably not a winner but it could be worth a shot.

Anyway, $50K seems low for a Wrongful Death claim. Especially since I don't think Florida splits up Wrongful Death and Survival actions the way Louisiana does. Maybe life is cheap in Florida?

Although I would bet that they did not say the only wanted $50K. They probably said it was worth more than $50K in the Complaint/Petition to keep it out of lower/small claims courts and the reporter didn't understand why that was in the Complaint/Petition.

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

I suspect they put in $50K as a placeholder just to meet some jurisdictional minimum but who knows.

It's a very sad story but legal cases always get mangled by the media beyond all recognition.

 

[St. Widge]

I suspect they put in $50K as a placeholder just to meet some jurisdictional minimum but who knows.

It's a very sad story but legal cases always get mangled by the media beyond all recognition.

Yeah, that's probably the reason for the $50K. But, very sad story. The reporting, as usual for legal cases, is pretty bad/misleading.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

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.

I can vouch for this with my tomato allergy. Shocked the hell out of me the first time it happened.

 

[bigdaddysaints]

i remember there was a thread here years ago (can't remember if the poster was on that plane or it was an article) about people who were upset that their plane was delayed because someone on the plane had a peanut allergy and they had to wait until the snacks were traded out. it turned into people with allergies like that shouldn't be accommodated if it was gonna cause issues. but come to find out the crew was alerted in advance when the flight was booked about the allergy and they failed to remember. that was why they delayed the plane.
i feel like i remember a couple posters were blaming and saying not so nice stuff about people with allergies..
my father in law has a shellfish allergy (sucky one to have in La) but his is nothing compared to how bad peanut allergies are. I've heard they she the worst, just the dust in the air can set it off I've read..

 

[efil4stnias]

i remember there was a thread here years ago (can't remember if the poster was on that plane or it was an article) about people who were upset that their plane was delayed because someone on the plane had a peanut allergy and they had to wait until the snacks were traded out. it turned into people with allergies like that shouldn't be accommodated if it was gonna cause issues. but come to find out the crew was alerted in advance when the flight was booked about the allergy and they failed to remember. that was why they delayed the plane.
i feel like i remember a couple posters were blaming and saying not so nice stuff about people with allergies..
my father in law has a shellfish allergy (sucky one to have in La) but his is nothing compared to how bad peanut allergies are. I've heard they she the worst, just the dust in the air can set it off I've read..

You remember correct. And I was one of those who they directed their "angst" toward.
I remember some of the handles that were in that thread...some still around some gone

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

You remember correct. And I was one of those who they directed their "angst" toward.
I remember some of the handles that were in that thread...some still around some gone

Are they on the list?

 

[efil4stnias]

Public outrage apparently played a role

Disney backtracks on wrongful death lawsuit after public fury

Disney had argued the widower's Disney+ contract would prevent the dispute reaching court.

www.newsweek.com

 

[FullMonte]

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.

Not to defend Disney in this case, but just for clarification....I thought that the issue here was that the individual also created an account on Disney's website, and ordered tickets through that website. I though the issue dealt with THAT website's arbitration clause, and not the Disney+ specific one.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Public outrage apparently played a role

Disney backtracks on wrongful death lawsuit after public fury

Disney had argued the widower's Disney+ contract would prevent the dispute reaching court.

www.newsweek.com

As it always does

 

[bigdaddysaints]

If the resturant was not Disney owned, that resturant would be mostly at fault, but if the resturant is inside Disney, i am sure they have to follow Disney protocols, and if Disney failed to regulate them properly, Disney does share some responsibility. When you eat somehwere inside of Disney, you assume its Disney owned, i am sure they want it to be assumed that way..
I am sure complacency played a big factor in this.

 

[superchuck500]

If the resturant was not Disney owned, that resturant would be mostly at fault, but if the resturant is inside Disney, i am sure they have to follow Disney protocols, and if Disney failed to regulate them properly, Disney does share some responsibility. When you eat somehwere inside of Disney, you assume its Disney owned, i am sure they want it to be assumed that way..
I am sure complacency played a big factor in this.

I dont think Disney takes on liability for every third-party vendors operating on Disney property - that would be highly undesirable and it’s just not necessary. That’s not the default legal result so why would Disney create that exposure by highly regulating each vendor to the extent that Disney takes on responsibility?

That would have to be created in the agreement between Disney and the vendor and I just doubt that Disney is agreeing to that level of inspection and regulation of the restaurant.

 

[superchuck500]

If the resturant was not Disney owned, that resturant would be mostly at fault, but if the resturant is inside Disney, i am sure they have to follow Disney protocols, and if Disney failed to regulate them properly, Disney does share some responsibility. When you eat somehwere inside of Disney, you assume its Disney owned, i am sure they want it to be assumed that way..
I am sure complacency played a big factor in this.

You’re right that the article does briefly mention that the same arbitration language accompanied the ticket purchase - which is FAR more relevant. I hate these kinds of articles.