In a legal battle unfolding in Florida, Disney argues that signing up for its popular streaming service, Disney+, means agreeing to settle any disputes out of court through arbitration. This stance is central to Disney’s request to dismiss a lawsuit involving the tragic death of 42-year-old New York doctor Kanokporn Tangsuan, who allegedly suffered a fatal allergic reaction after dining at an Irish pub in Disney Springs last October.
The lawsuit, brought by Tangsuan’s husband Jeffrey Piccolo, claims that Tangsuan, a family medicine specialist from NYU Langone’s office in Carle Place, Long Island, died after consuming food at Raglan Road, an eatery within the Disney Springs complex. Piccolo asserts that the restaurant, despite being advertised as offering “allergen-free food,” failed to prevent cross-contamination, leading to Tangsuan’s death from anaphylactic shock.
Disney’s motion to dismiss, submitted to the Florida court, states that the arbitration clause embedded in Disney+’s Terms of Use precludes Piccolo from suing the company in court. Disney highlights that Piccolo, while signing up for a one-month free trial of Disney+ in 2019, had acknowledged reviewing the fine print, which included a binding arbitration clause. This clause mandates that disputes involving The Walt Disney Company or its affiliates must be resolved through individual binding arbitration, except for small claims.
Disney expands its argument by pointing out that Piccolo accepted a similar arbitration agreement upon creating an account on Disney’s website and app before the ill-fated visit. The company further contends that whether Piccolo read the service terms is inconsequential, emphasizing that the arbitration provision covers “all disputes.”
In response, Piccolo’s lawyer, Brian Denney, argues that it is “absurd” to suggest over 150 million Disney+ subscribers have irrevocably waived their right to sue Disney or its affiliates under any circumstance, unrelated to the streaming service. Denney insists that expecting a consumer to permanently forfeit their right to a jury trial in any dispute with a Disney entity is “outrageously unreasonable and unfair.”
Disney, while expressing deep condolences to Tangsuan’s family, maintains that Raglan Road is an independently owned and operated business, merely leasing a space in Disney Springs. The company specifies that their legal defense does not impact Piccolo’s claims against the restaurant.
The lawsuit, filed in February, details that Tangsuan, Piccolo, and his mother chose Raglan Road on October 5, 2023, based on its allergen-free claims on Disney’s website. Despite repeatedly informing their server of Tangsuan’s severe allergies to nuts and dairy, Tangsuan suffered a fatal reaction after dining on vegan fritters, scallops, onion rings, and a vegan shepherd’s pie—food allegedly guaranteed to be allergen-free by the waiter.
About 45 minutes after their meal, Tangsuan began struggling to breathe while shopping nearby. Despite using an EpiPen, she collapsed and later died in the hospital. The medical examiner determined her death resulted from anaphylaxis caused by elevated levels of dairy and nut in her system.
A hearing on Disney’s motion is scheduled for October 2 in county court in Orlando. Piccolo’s lawsuit seeks damages exceeding $50,000.
