Search results

And when juries ignore the law, the appeals court usually strikes it down. But this is NEVER going to trial. Disney will write a huge check just to avoid the negative PR of them seemingly going against the family.

Yes...but the post is fine. "lifestyler" is a fair term describing how awesome a new Disney restaurant is or trying to justify something Disney has done. But in this case, the story was valid and since this thread is full of twitter comments, I'd surmise we're allowing an expanded definition of...

Where did it say they wouldn't put any teeth into it? There is no reason just to make up things and insinuate. I really don't think some Grand Floridian employee is going to ignore a guest's comment that an alligator has been spotted now. As for the statement... it was easy to understand and...

They are appeasing their bank accounts.

So many water areas. Even at Pop there are tons of walkways toward the parking lots that are just feet from the water. It'll be curious to see how extensive they get with these.

I assure you this fence idea was internal and not listening to whining. While they might not be negligent in this case. If they did nothing and it happened again, they sure would be.

Yep i edited my post as I saw it went up. Definitely a People fence.

I expect those fences will be everywhere plus signage. Glad they are doing it quickly. Sad it happened. While a fluke, you just can't risk it again.

The reason why they are adding the signs is obvious: now that an attack was happened, not putting up a sign would make them guilty of negligence under Florida law if another attack occurred.

This has been explained numerous times by the FWC. Disney is permitted to remove them. They don't have to call anybody in to do it.

I' I am pretty sure they will be very vigilant going after them from now on.

It was the first fatality. That attack was known about prior. The media just didn't do their diligence in finding that story originally.

and I don't sue humans or companies over wild animals unless they are the ones who inserted the wild animals into the area. It's not rocket science. But if you want the law behind it, read this...

Child wasn't in a foot of water. He had his "foot" in the water.

But what if someone doesn't know what the colors mean? What if they aren't from the area. I'm being facetious. But that's only when they spot something right? So if an attack happens when they don't see a shark, we don't expect to sue.

I've never been to an ocean where the beach had shark warning signs. Just saying you can't put signs up for everything.

That "paper" is a tabloid n the UK, btw.

Disney will cut a check well before a trial ever happens and this is me saying Disney isn't at fault. But being right or wrong doesn't matter sometimes. This case would be bad PR.

Good article about the legal liability in Florida from wild animal attacks. http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/15/opinions/hotels-may-avoid-liability-alligator-attack-danny-cevallos/index.html?sr=twCNN061516hotels-may-avoid-liability-alligator-attack-danny-cevallos1015PMVODtopPhoto&linkId=25587412

Simple changes would be closing the beaches at night and give more specific signage and warnings in check in documents.. Movies are at the pool areas at many resorts so that is a simple change as well.