Disney Faces Backlash in Legal Battle Over Fatal Allergy Incident at Florida Restaurant

Woke Disney faces more challenges, as they make astounding claims in court

The Walt Disney Company is facing criticism and continued legal opposition from a Long Island family following the tragic death of their loved one, Amy Tangsuan, after she suffered a fatal allergic reaction at a Disney Springs restaurant. The family’s determination to seek justice has only intensified after Disney’s recent request for a Florida court to dismiss their lawsuit, citing fine print agreements linked to its Disney+ app.

Disney is trying to get a wrongful death lawsuit from a grieving husband tossed out of court because he signed up to Disney+ years earlier.

His wife suffered a fatal allergic reaction at a Disney Springs restaurant but Disney insist that the husband agreed to arbitrate all… pic.twitter.com/xj2vHZMQgp

— DiscussingFilm (@DiscussingFilm) August 14, 2024

Amy Tangsuan, a doctor from Plainview, New York, was always cautious when dining out due to her severe dairy and nut allergies, according to her best friend, Sabrina Martini. Martini emphasized that Tangsuan consistently communicated her allergies to restaurant staff, and those dining with her would often reiterate the importance of allergen-free food preparation.

In October, during a visit to the Raglan Road restaurant in Disney Springs, Tangsuan’s husband, Jeffrey Piccolo, claims that the waiter assured them multiple times that specific dishes could be made allergen-free. Tragically, Tangsuan later died from anaphylaxis, with elevated levels of dairy and nuts found in her system.

The family’s lawsuit has been met with what they describe as a shocking response from Disney. The company argues that Piccolo, who signed up for Disney+ years earlier, had agreed to arbitrate all disputes with Disney, effectively waiving his right to sue. Disney is now asking the court to enforce this arbitration clause, which was also allegedly agreed upon more recently when Piccolo purchased Epcot tickets online.

Disney is arguing that the arbitration clause of the TOS the decedent agreed to when signing up for a Disney+ free trial covers a wrongful death claim relating to food served at a Disney restaurant…

Good luck with that. pic.twitter.com/wqvnsnvZ7A

— Rob Freund (@RobertFreundLaw) August 14, 2024

Tangsuan’s cousin, attorney Peter Giattino, expressed outrage at Disney’s defense, stating, “She was stolen from him, and now, in effect, what Disney is doing is trying to steal his day in court.” He argued that such a precedent would be dangerous, as it could apply to countless consumers who have unknowingly waived their legal rights through similar user agreements.

The case has broader implications for anyone who has ever signed a user agreement, as legal experts note that arbitration clauses are common and often enforceable. While arbitration can be a more cost-effective alternative to a jury trial, it also limits the potential for substantial punitive damages and the emotional appeal that might sway a jury.

Martini, speaking on behalf of Tangsuan’s grieving family, emphasized the need for a court trial to ensure that the truth is uncovered and that such a tragedy does not happen to anyone else. “I lost my best friend,” Martini said. “I wouldn’t want anyone else to lose theirs.”

A doctor died at a Disney Springs restaurant from an allergic reaction after being assured the meal was allergen-free

The widower then sued

Disney is now trying to dismiss the suit — arguing he agreed to arbitrate all disputes when signing up for a Disney+ free trial years… pic.twitter.com/uCPljTN6e3

— Culture Crave 🍿 (@CultureCrave) August 14, 2024

Major Points:

• A Long Island family is fighting Disney’s legal response after a loved one died from an allergic reaction at a Disney Springs restaurant.
• Disney is seeking to dismiss the lawsuit, citing arbitration clauses in the fine print of its Disney+ app and other agreements.
• The family argues that Disney’s actions are denying their right to a day in court, calling the company’s defense shocking and unjust.
• The case raises concerns about the broader implications of user agreements and arbitration clauses for consumers.
• The family seeks justice to prevent similar incidents in the future, emphasizing the need for accountability.

Kirk Volo – Reprinted with permission of Whatfinger News