SoylentNews

Arthur T Knackerbracket [soylentnews.org] writes:

https://boingboing.net/2024/08/21/after-massive-public-outcry-disney-stops-attempt-to-kill-lawsuit-after-killing-restaurant-guest.html

AP reported yesterday that "Disney drops bid to have allergy-death lawsuit tossed because plaintiff signed up for Disney+."

I'm not a lawyer but the initial legal argument being made by Disney seems to me to be pure bad faith horseshit. This piece in New York Magazine looks at the lawsuit stemming from the allergic reaction death of a doctor named Amy Tangsuan at a Disney World Resort restaurant:

Tangsuan was allergic to dairy and nuts, and before she and her husband ordered, (they) asked a waiter whether any of the allergens were in her order... The waiter consulted with the chef, and then assured her that they could be made dairy- and nut-free.

About 45 minutes after Tangsuan ate, she went into an anaphylactic shock so severe her EpiPen was useless. She died soon after at a nearby hospital. In February, her husband filed a wrongful-death suit against the restaurant and Disney's theme-parks division, seeking money damages.

[...] Did they try this now abandoned tactic to save money? Of course. But it sounds like they're really doing it to save face — by moving cases to arbitration, it's permanently out of the public's view; however the case is settled, the general public will almost certainly be in the dark. PR problem of killing guests thus solved.

Original Submission