Disney wants lawsuit over doctor's death dismissed over husband's subscription

Disney is attempting to get a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the widower of a 42-year-old New York University doctor dismissed, stating that he signed up for the streaming service years earlier. The doctor died in Florida in October last year following an allergic reaction after eating at the theme park restaurant.

Jeffrey Piccolo, the widower of Kanokporn Tangsuan, is suing Disney. However, according to court papers, the streaming media has now claimed that the $50,000 suit should be tossed because Piccolo agreed to arbitration when he first signed up for a one-month trial of the Disney+ streaming service back in 2019, court documents showed.

Tangsuan and Piccolo dined at the Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant in October last year. Piccolo said his wife was highly allergic to dairy and nuts, and the couple chose to eat at the pub because they believed Disney would have proper safety regulations in place, Daily Mail reported. According to the lawsuit, the couple repeatedly asked their server about allergen-free food, and was assured of the same when she ordered onion rings, broccoli, corn fritters and scallops.

Soon after leaving the pub, the 42-year-old medical professional began having difficulty in breathing and collapsed. Despite self-administering an epi pen, Tangsuan died shortly after at a local hospital.

Piccolo has sought expenses for mental pain and suffering, loss of income and funeral expenses besides the over $50,000 in damages. He claimed in the lawsuit that the theme park was negligent and failed to properly train their staff about food allergies, the Daily Mail report added.

In a May 31 motion, Disney argued that the Disney+ subscriber agreement Piccolo created in November 2019 and used to buy tickets to Epcot (Walt Disney theme park) in 2023, required him to agree to their terms and conditions. The company argued that he agreed to the terms of their 'Subscriber Agreement', which is an arbitration clause in Section 7.

"[The section] applies to 'all disputes' including those involving 'The Walt Disney Company or its affiliates.' Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is an affiliate of The Walt Disney Company," the company argued. Disney said the same terms were applicable in the Epcot purchase as well.

Disney further stated that in agreeing to the terms, Piccolo represented his late wife.

The widower's lawyers have slammed Disney's latest motion as "preposterous" and "outrageously unreasonable", the New York Post reported.

The lawyers have also argued that Disney lost its right to seek arbitration when it filed its first response to Piccolo's lawsuit without mentioning the matter.