Mission: Space tragedy

[Raven66]

Judges say Disney can be sued over ride safety By Gina Keating
Fri Jun 17, 3:52 AM ET

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Days after a young boy died on a space ride at Walt Disney World, the California Supreme Court opened a new avenue to sue Disney and other theme park operators, ruling the parks have a duty to keep customers safe, even when they seek the thrill of danger.

The ruling, released on Thursday, was a victory for the family of a 23-year-old Spanish woman who suffered a fatal brain injury aboard the Indiana Jones ride during her 2000 honeymoon at Disneyland in southern California.

The court said the family could sue Walt Disney Co . under a state law usually applied to transportation companies. Disney declined to comment on the ruling. The case now returns to Los Angeles Superior Court for trial.

The decision comes days after a 4-year-old boy died of unknown causes after riding Disney's Mission:Space ride at Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida. No cause of death has been identified.

The California court ruled that Walt Disney Co was required to provide vehicles that are "safe and fit for the purposes to which they are put."

Cristina Moreno suffered a brain aneurysm as a result of "violent shaking and stress" she experienced on the ride, her family's lawyer, Barry Novak said. She died in Spain about two months later.

Rob Doughty, vice president for communications at Disneyland resort, commented on the decision: "While we disagree with the decision, it has nothing to do with the safety of our parks. Our commitment to guest safety has been, and continues to be, unwavering."

Novak, who has litigated several brain trauma cases against Disney and other parks, said the opinion means that theme parks "must warn the public that the rides can cause serious injury and even death to people without preexisting conditions."

Disney had argued it had no liability as a transportation provider because its passengers were seeking thrills and pleasure, not trying to get to a destination.

SURPRISED, FRIGHTENED, NOT HURT

But the court responded in its 4-to-3 decision: "Certainly there is no justification for imposing a lesser duty of care on the operators of roller coasters simply because the primary purpose of the transportation provided is entertainment ... The rider expects to be surprised and perhaps even frightened but not hurt."

Disney recently prevailed in a safety-related issue in a lawsuit with a ride manufacturer over Mission:Space.

Environmental Tectonics Corp of Pennsylvania, which designed and built Mission:Space, claimed in a 2003 lawsuit that its engineers had been banned from safety tests and wanted to be relieved of liability in the event of an accident.

A federal judge in Philadelphia dismissed the safety claim from ETC's lawsuit on Monday, the same day the 4-year-old boy passed out and died after riding Mission:Space.

An autopsy found no trauma but was inconclusive about the cause of his death. Further test results are expected in about a month.

A lawyer for ETC would not comment on whether the company would try to reinstate the safety claims. The case, which includes cross claims by Disney about time and cost overruns on the ride, is scheduled for trial in September.

ETC was "enormously saddened" to hear of the child's death but made no other comment about the accident or litigation in a written statement released on Thursday.

The boy's death has renewed calls by California-based consumer group Saferparks for federal oversight of theme parks, which are exempted in Florida and other states from ride regulation and inspection laws that govern mobile carnivals.

Data provided by the International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions shows 3,900 injuries nationwide in 2003 and an average of two fatalities from 315 million visits made each year to theme parks.



I just read this on Yahoo. Am I understanding this right? Disney can be sued because that lady died 2 months later because of an aneurysm? Wouldn't this have been there already? I mean I'm not a doctor, but does shaking and stress cause this? If it's true then Disney and others might as well pack it in because there will be aneurysms popping every where. I don't mean to be harsh but I just don't understand the ruling.

 

[KaliSplash]

I have read every single post. It's taken me two days to catch up.

Some more observations. Like sleepybear, I'm a reporter.

News is what's unusual. It is not news that a building is NOT on fire. It is news when a building is on fire. It is not news when a plane does not crash. It is news when a plane does crash.

It is unusual to have deaths at WDW. It is more unusual because of the perception, correct I think, that Disney does a better job than the average theme park of ensuring guest safety. (And I'm not talking about the dippy bag checks.).

I know that is local media around the country determine that a family has died en route to or en route home from WDW, that gets mentioned in the story. Why? Because they died during a happy time of their lives. When we least expect it. And yes, all the media play that up. It grabs the heartstrings and the readers/viewers/listeners.

It is well-known among folks here and some knowledgeable people in the local media in Orlando that M:S is the only ride with barf bags. That is why you see the constant reference to the 'so intense that it has sent some riders to the hospital and has barf bags' line in the stories. This is what is especially unusual about this ride, as compared to the Graviton at the State Fair.

These unusual aspects are being emphasized because that's what reporters do. We emphasize unusual stories. Do we run them in the ground (especially in this 24/hour news channel world in which we live?) Absolutely. I left the tv biz a dozen years ago, in part because tv news is the news we have pictures of, as opposed to the most important stories of the day.

The other thing we reporters do is report what we know. When we don't know everything about a situation, we look for any information that might pertain to the story. We also have a tendency to try to 'bring the story home' as much as possible. So while Orlando area media is reporting that a boy died after riding M:S, the Pennsylvania media will focus on the victm's family and then someone remembered the lawsuit by the company that did the original design. Thus those aspects are being emphasized in the reports you see in Pa. And I assure you, that lawsuit is about money, not about the company being excluded from the final safety testing. All lawsuits against Disney are about money, regardless of how the participants may 'spin' the matter.

I assure you, every editor that day said, what do we know about Mission:Space? Any previous problems with it? That adds context to the story. It also provides more information on a topic of hot interest. The 50 pages of this thread would indicate this is a story of hot interest.

As to the CPR issue. CPR is not a miracle. It is my understanding it rarely works when someone is in complete arrest. Does it increase the chances for survival? Yes. A 6 percent chance is better than no chance. But it's still only a 6 percent chance. No I do not have actual figures, but I based on what I've been told, in most cases of complete arrest, CPR does not save lives.
Is it better to start sooner rather than later, Absolutely. But as The Mom pointed, it takes a little bit of time to determine that it's needed and can be dangerous if it's not.

On another topic. A 4 minute-30 second response time for the paramedics is wonderful. Most cities are happy if they have a response time under 9 minutes.

As I mentioned back in post 225, there is no evidence the ride malfunctioned. Everyone else was fine. This is why so many people are defending Disney. More than 8 million people have riden M:S and this is the first death.

And finally, and most importantly, it is a tragedy beyond belief to have a child die.

 

[Shaman]

More than 8 million people have riden M:S and this is the first death.

And finally, and most importantly, it is a tragedy beyond belief to have a child die.

The child did not die while riding M:S...though it still remains to be seen if it contributed to his death..for all we know he could have been dying before he went into the ride...

But all that being said, I totally agree with your last statement...

 

[KaliSplash]

The child did not die while riding M:S...though it still remains to be seen if it contributed to his death..for all we know he could have been dying before he went into the ride...

But all that being said, I totally agree with your last statement...

You are correct. What I should have said was it's the first death after riding.

 

[KaliSplash]

As to the new story just posted by Raven66, That's the way I'd read it, too.

Which is a quite distressing ruling. Not sure that a federal court would intervene in a finding by the California Supreme Court that allows lawsuits to be filed in state courts in California, but if not, that would open Disney and Universal and other California-based operators to a host of legal problems, it would seem.

In fact, since the Walt Disney Company is based in California, the Florida death could probably be filed in California. Usually, such lawsuits are allowed where the event happened or whether the defendant resides.

 

[jws25]

part of the problem is the warnings on the rides. I know your are thinking "What!?" but just follow me on this one. Nearly every ride you go on at Disney or any other theme park or carnival has warnings out the wazoo regardless of the intensity. So what has happened over the years is people have become desensitized to these warnings and because of that they ignore them.

Master Yoda, you are absolutely right. I myself was "duped" by this. I have never had motion sickness, am in good health, and love thrill rides, so I didn't think anything of the many warnings at M:S. This ride made me pass out. I ignored the warnings for the very reason you said, I've seen the same ones hundreds of times, and have become desensitized to them.