Disney dismissed a wrongful death lawsuit, citing that the deceased individual had an account on Disney+

The particular case provoked controversial reactions on social media.

Disney Plus
Disney Plus (Captura)

A curious case is recorded in the courts of New York, after a man sued Disney for wrongful death following the death of his wife at a company resort last year. Jeffrey Piccolo is the husband of Kanokporn Tangsuan, a doctor at New York University who died after an allergic reaction she acquired from the food at Disney Springs, located in Florida.

PUBLICIDAD

Piccolo is demanding a $50,000 economic compensation in his lawsuit, based on damages and losses under Florida's wrongful death law, as well as mental pain and suffering, loss of income, and funeral expenses. The giant company rejected this claim with an argument that has gone viral on social media.

PUBLICIDAD

Disney Defense

According to The New York Post, Disney is seeking to have the wrongful death lawsuit filed by the grieving husband of the New York University doctor dismissed because she had signed up for the Disney+ streaming service years earlier, according to court documents.

The company claims that the $50,000 lawsuit should be taken out of the courts because Piccolo agreed to arbitrate all disputes with the company when he first signed up for a one-month trial of the Disney+ streaming service in 2019.

In addition, Disney says that the man accepted the same terms when he used their app, My Disney Experience, to purchase tickets for the resort in September 2023, a month before his wife's death.

On the other hand, Piccolo's legal team pointed out that the American company's claim is "outrageously unreasonable" in a motion filed on August 2nd.

"The notion that the terms agreed to by a consumer when creating a Disney+ free trial account would forever exclude that consumer's right to a jury trial in any dispute with any Disney affiliate or subsidiary is so outrageously unreasonable and unfair as to shock the judicial conscience, and this court should not enforce such an agreement."

The case remains open for negotiation, awaiting a decision from the courts in New York.

PUBLICIDAD

Last Stories

We Recommend