Many of you may already know that the Disney+ Wrongful Death Lawsuit surfaced because of a sad case that happened where a woman died right after she had eaten at a Disney resort. The lawsuit has caught the public’s attention, mainly because of the way the Disney Company initially reacted to the legal claim. The lawsuit is essentially about whether Disney is liable for the death of the woman and what they did in response to the lawsuit. To make sure that the case is well understood we should take it part by part starting from its basic definition and then moving on to its details, so, let’s just do that.
So, What Really Happened?
Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan, who was a doctor based in New York, met an unfortunate end at the Raglan Road Irish Pub situated in Disney Springs, Florida due to the food served there. The thing is, she had zero tolerance for milk and any form of nuts, being quite allergic to them, also, she had told the restaurant about her situation regarding allergies before. Nevertheless, after she consumed the food from Raglan Road she had a strong allergic reaction that took her life later that day. The medical report confirmed that anaphylaxis, which is a severe allergic reaction was triggered because of the consumption of milk and nuts, and that was mainly the cause of her death.
Her husband, Jeffrey Piccolo has already initiated legal action against Disney and the restaurant, which we now know as Disney+ Wrongful Death Lawsuit. He says they are guilty of negligence because they still did not take the necessary precautions even after being alerted about their wife’s allergies. In the lawsuit, Piccolo asked for over $50,000 in damages for pain and suffering, medical expenses, and other losses.
Disney’s Initial Legal Strategy
Disney’s first official reaction to this lawsuit was kinda unexpected and seemed suspicious to the general public. You know, instead of permitting the case to go to a regular court where a jury would be present, Disney insisted on handling the situation through arbitration. What is arbitration? Well, it is a private legal procedure where a neutral third party comes to a decision while the jury is not there, so yes, outside the court that means.
Public Relations Backlash
Though, when the legal reaction from Disney was publicly disclosed, it set off a major backlash. Why exactly? Many people felt that the company was completely wrong to have the Disney+ arbitration clause invoked in a matter related to someone’s death. And as always, unsurprisingly, social media went wild with criticism, including those calling the decision “cold” and “insensitive.” Some even called for Disney+ to be boycotted. The media caught on to this story, and several of them were published that criticized Disney for making an attempt at dodging a jury trial in such a delicate matter. The backlash arose from the belief that Disney was trying to escape responsibility by relying on some fine print in the Disney+ contract.
