In a significant legal pivot, Disney has announced that it will not exercise its right to arbitration in a lawsuit concerning the tragic death of a woman due to an allergic reaction at one of its restaurants, allowing the matter to advance to a courtroom setting rather than being settled behind closed doors. According to FOX 35 Orlando, Disney had initially invoked an arbitration agreement tied to the deceased woman's husband's Disney+ subscription in an attempt to mitigate legal proceedings.
This unexpected move comes nearly a year after Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan died following a meal at Raglan Road in Disney Springs, where she, her husband Jeffrey Piccolo, and her mother-in-law had dined, after which she suffered a severe allergic reaction, at the time of her death she and her husband informed their server of her severe allergy to dairy and nuts, and the staff had assured them that their food would be free of these allergens, however, following the meal, Dr. Tangsuan experienced the fatal allergic reaction upon entering Planet Hollywood. As reported by ClickOrlando, the company's statement, quoting Josh D’Amaro, Chairman of Disney Experiences, "At Disney, we strive to put humanity above all other considerations. 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. As such, we’ve decided to waive our right to arbitration and have the matter proceed in court."
Disney's insistence on arbitration was initially predicated on a 2019 agreement that Piccolo reportedly clicked through when signing up for a free trial of Disney+ on his PlayStation, which contained an arbitration clause, now as the lawsuit gains traction, Piccolo's legal team has branded Disney's original arbitration argument as "fatally flawed" and they are currently seeking damages well in excess of $50,000 for mental pain and suffering resulting from negligence, as reported by ClickOrlando. Disney itself has switched its stance, sparking conversations about the importance of thoroughly reading the fine print when agreeing to service terms.
.jpg){kind=link}