Wrongful Death Lawsuit and Disney's Scary Attempt

[TrainsOfDisney]

Along with tickets

I happen to have a ticket handy haha. On the ticket it’s “must be litigated in the state of Florida”

 

[Lilofan]

I happen to have a ticket handy haha. On the ticket it’s “must be litigated in the state of Florida”

CYA as much as possible and most probably never read the fine print.

 

[Chi84]

Im pretty sure i read it does as well

Along with tickets and buying genie/ill etc

It doesn’t. Disney’s motion to compel says that the MDE terms and conditions state they apply in addition to the Disney terms of use and then contains a hyperlink to the terms of use that contain the arbitration clause.

The MDE terms and conditions expressly state that you’re agreeing that any claim, action or lawsuit has to be filed in Orange County Florida and that Florida law will be applied. The plaintiff points out in his response that this is contradictory to the terms of use and its arbitration clause.

I would really love to know what provoked Disney’s motion.

 

[NelsonRD]

Arbitration clauses are unconstitutional? Do you have authority for this or just what you hope is the case?

I did not say arbitration clauses are unconstitutional. I said you cannot sign away your constitutional rights, which includes due process. You can put whatever arbitration clause, or waiver in writing, but at the end of the day, you are not releasing your right to due process no matter what you signed.

If you sign a waiver to go down a zip line, and the harness breaks due to negligence, and you fall, you can sue no matter what you signed before you got on.

 

[Chi84]

I did not say arbitration clauses are unconstitutional. I said you cannot sign away your constitutional rights, which includes due process. You can put whatever arbitration clause, or waiver in writing, but at the end of the day, you are not releasing your right to due process no matter what you signed.

If you sign a waiver to go down a zip line, and the harness breaks due to negligence, and you fall, you can sue no matter what you signed before you got on.

Negligence is generally not subject to waiver because of public policy. But that has nothing to do with arbitration, which is the decision making process.

You could certainly agree to arbitrate a party’s negligence. It’s done all the time.

 

[NelsonRD]

Negligence is generally not subject to waiver because of public policy. But that has nothing to do with arbitration, which is the decision making process.

You could certainly agree to arbitrate a party’s negligence. It’s done all the time.

I didn’t say you couldn’t arbitrate either. I simply said you always have a right to due process.
Seems like you are picking an argument for no reason here.

 

[erasure fan1]

Serious, question that maybe you can try to respond with without an insult.

You have a better chance of Walt himself showing up at your door with free tickets to the parks for life.

It is explicitly stated that they don't guarantee anything is allergen free.

My question would be, do they state that to every customer who asks about allergies? My daughter is anaphylactic to dairy, but I trust Disney as far as I can throw them. So when we were there last year we didn't bother asking anyone, so I really don't know. I'm not sure putting a policy out there that you have to go look up is going to fly. Every customer who inquires needs to be told, we try our best but if it's life and death, we would recommend you not eat here. And then they would need to have them sign a waver I would assume. As I said, I really don't know how the whole procedure works. But I do know Disney LOVES to brag about how allergy friendly they are.

 

[Chi84]

I didn’t say you couldn’t arbitrate either. I simply said you always have a right to due process.
Seems like you are picking an argument for no reason here.

I’m sorry, I don’t understand. What do you mean by due process and what does it have to do with waiving arbitration?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

My question would be, do they state that to every customer who asks about allergies?

When I used to ask about gluten - I was given options that were implied to be guaranteed to be allergen free. Once the chef even told me “if you just order it, it’s supposed to be made in a separate fryer but we don’t guarantee it hasn’t been cross contaminated, if you’d like to wait an extra few minutes I can make it in the back in the allergy free kitchen”

 

[TalkToEthan]

. You name EVERYONE, and after the dust settles, if they’re not responsible, it will be determined.

“shotgun approach”

and the jurist has a duty to take this low road or run the risk of getting sued himself and if ‘egregious’ enough will also have to deal with the bar under some ethics violation.

just another example as to why there is very little honor left in the profession be it in the civil or criminal arena.

 

[Chi84]

“shotgun approach”

and the jurist has a duty to take this low road or run the risk of getting sued himself and if ‘egregious’ enough will also have to deal with the bar under some ethics violation.

just another example as to why there is very little honor left in the profession be it in the civil or criminal arena.

It’s not a low road. It’s just that lawsuits have to be filed before discovery and investigation can take place. So it is necessary to name anyone who might be liable.

As facts become known and the applicable law is ascertained, parties who are not liable will be dismissed from the case.

I’m sorry you feel that way about the legal profession.

 

[TalkToEthan]

It’s not a low road.

It’s legal; it’s widely practiced; it’s disgusting

“shotgun”

shooting(suing) indiscriminately looking to hit somebody, anybody ain’t morally right.

…to the innocent victims of this tactic answering complaints ain’t fun…..causes stress and costs money to defend and in select cases sends them into bk.

 

[Chi84]

It’s legal; it’s widely practiced; it’s disgusting

“shotgun”

shooting(suing) indiscriminately looking to hit somebody, anybody ain’t morally right.

…to the innocent victims of this tactic answering complaints ain’t fun…..causes stress and costs money to defend and in select cases sends them into bk.

No one is doing that here, so why bring it up? The plaintiff sued only 2 parties - Raglan and Disney.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Disney has had combined accounts for ages. Disneyworld, disney cruises, espn, d+, +++

D+ hasn’t been around for ages.

 

[flynnibus]

D+ hasn’t been around for ages.

And when d+ came into play… it plugged into the EXISTING system that had already been around for ages.

Disney has had a common account system for ages because it blew so much money on the stupid go.com acquisition back in the dotcom era and eventually moved all its platforms to use the shared platform

 

[castlecake2.0]

You have a better chance of Walt himself showing up at your door with free tickets to the parks for life.

My question would be, do they state that to every customer who asks about allergies? My daughter is anaphylactic to dairy, but I trust Disney as far as I can throw them. So when we were there last year we didn't bother asking anyone, so I really don't know. I'm not sure putting a policy out there that you have to go look up is going to fly. Every customer who inquires needs to be told, we try our best but if it's life and death, we would recommend you not eat here. And then they would need to have them sign a waver I would assume. As I said, I really don't know how the whole procedure works. But I do know Disney LOVES to brag about how allergy friendly they are.

It says it all in their verbiage on websites and menus, something like "we take every effort possible but will never guarantee 100%". Disney does not have separate kitchens for allergies.

 

[TalkToEthan]

No one is doing that here, so why bring it up? The plaintiff sued only 2 parties - Raglan and Disney.

I did not bring it up——I responded to a post that did

 

[Lilofan]

Honestly I suspect it’s a brain drain at their in-house legal department and someone doing something dumb. The last 4 years have seen a lot of attorneys retire and there is a huge loss of institutional knowledge there just like everywhere else. Couple that with the fact that Disney does not pay wages commensurate with equivalent in-house counsel at other large corporations, and you end up with stupid PR/strategy mistakes like this one.

Who knows if some on the legal team at WDW relocated to cheaper COL FL compared to parts of expensive North , Far West , took a lower salary and enjoy the benefits of being a cast member - Play in the parks for free for them, their families and friends!

 

[GimpYancIent]

It’s not a low road. It’s just that lawsuits have to be filed before discovery and investigation can take place. So it is necessary to name anyone who might be liable.

As facts become known and the applicable law is ascertained, parties who are not liable will be dismissed from the case.

I’m sorry you feel that way about the legal profession.

What you say is true, sadly, a person unintentionally died due to an issue at an eatery. The position taken by the eatery in question and Disney is not sympathetic to the grieving parties. NOW, enter the attorneys, legal speak and process. Bottom line, the beneficiaries are the attorneys. The eatery in question and Disney could have taken a diplomatic / sympathetic approach rather than hard line and have a better public image plus (in the long run) less costly situation.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

What you say is true, sadly, a person unintentionally died due to an issue at an eatery. The position taken by the eatery in question and Disney is not sympathetic to the grieving parties. NOW, enter the attorneys, legal speak and process. Bottom line, the beneficiaries are the attorneys. The eatery in question and Disney could have taken a diplomatic / sympathetic approach rather than hard line and have a better public image plus (in the long run) less costly situation.

I don't think Disney's unsympathetic or not, but the bad press that this "defense" has brought about seems like it was not worth it. If you Google "restaurant allergy death", this story is what you will find, and it's because the attempt to force arbitration is the main story.

I imagine Disney is involved in multiple personal injury suits that we never hear about because they either settle, the judge throws them out because there is no liability or they get litigated to the end and awarded.

The attempt to force arbitration(and no they are not just asking, they are trying to compel it) due to signing up for a service seemingly unrelated to the case is what got the press. And rightfully so.