Disney+ streaming terms mean lawsuit after LI doc Kanokporn Tangsuan's food allergy death must be tossed, Disney says

Disney has asked a Florida court to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the husband of a Carle Place physician who suffered a fatal allergic reaction after eating at a Disney Springs restaurant.

The company cited legal language agreed to years earlier when Jeffrey Piccolo, widower of Kanokporn Tangsuan, 42, of Plainview, signed up for a one-month trial of the Disney+ streaming service that requires users to arbitrate all disputes with the company, records show.

Attorneys for Piccolo called Disney's motion "preposterous," adding that it's "absurd" to believe that the 153 million subscribers to the popular streaming service have waived all claims against the company and its affiliates because of language "buried" within the terms and conditions.

"The notion that terms agreed to by a consumer when creating a Disney+ free trial account would forever bar that consumer’s right to a jury trial in any dispute with any Disney affiliate or subsidiary, is so outrageously unreasonable and unfair as to shock the judicial conscience, and this court should not enforce such an agreement," wrote Brian Denney, Piccolo's West Palm Beach attorney, in an Aug. 2 court filing in Orange County, Florida.

Walt Disney Parks and Resorts and their attorneys did not respond to requests for comment.

In its May 31 motion asking the court to move the case to arbitration, Disney attorneys wrote that the Disney+ subscriber agreement stipulates that any dispute, with the exception of small claims, "must be resolved by individual binding arbitration." Similar language, they said, was agreed to by Piccolo when he used a Disney app to purchase tickets to Epcot.

"Whether Piccolo actually reviewed the Disney terms is also immaterial," the motion states. 

Disney's argument appears to be unusual.

A Newsday search of state and federal court filings found no previous cases in which Disney attempted to move a lawsuit to arbitration because the plaintiff had signed up for a Disney+ account.

A California judge last year ruled that a Pennsylvania man could not sue ESPN, a Disney property, because of similar arbitration language on the website of the sports behemoth.

Arbitration is a private dispute resolution in which cases are determined by an arbitrator as opposed to a judge.

Tangsuan, a family medicine specialist with NYU Langone's Carle Place office, dined on Oct. 5 at Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant at Disney Springs with her husband and mother-in-law.

On several occasions before ordering, Tangsuan informed the servers of her severe peanut and dairy allergies and the staff "unequivocally assured them that the food would be allergen free," according to a lawsuit filed by Piccolo in February.

Tangsuan ordered a broccoli and corn fritter, scallops, onion rings and vegan shepherd's pie, the family said. She began having severe difficulty breathing shortly after dinner and self-administered an epi-pen, the suit states. Tangsuan died at a hospital.

A medical examiner attributed her death to anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nuts in her system, according to the suit.

Piccolo, who is seeking damages in excess of $50,000 pursuant to Florida’s wrongful death act, as well as mental pain and suffering, loss of income and companionship, and medical and funeral expenses, declined to comment on the Disney filing.

In its motion, Disney said that Piccolo established his account with Disney by signing up for a Disney+ trial account on his PlayStation in 2019 and in September 2023 used his account under the "My Disney Experience" app to purchase tickets to Epcot. Tangsuan died before they could use the tickets.

In both instances, Disney said, Piccolo was notified that by clicking “Agree & Continue” he was accepting the company’s “subscriber agreement,” which includes the arbitration language.

Peter Giattino, of Wading River, another attorney representing Piccolo, said Disney is attempting to set a dangerous precedent.

"Kanokporn was stolen from her husband and now Disney is seeking to steal his right to a jury trial and their day in court," he said. "It's absolutely absurd."

But Joan Stearns Johnsen, director of the Institute for Dispute Resolution at the University of Florida, Levin College of Law, said "consumer arbitration" agreements are not altogether unusual and have been upheld by courts.

"With few exceptions they've been found to be enforceable," Johnsen said. "... It's a contract. You've checked 'OK.' You've scrolled down and done whatever else you need to do. And so you've consented."

Denney called Disney's argument "fatally flawed," noting that Piccolo filed the suit as the "personal representative of the estate of Kanokporn Tangsuan" and not on behalf of himself. The Disney+ agreement, meanwhile, stipulates that Piccolo only agreed to arbitrate claims concerning the streaming service, Denney said.

Disney, he wrote, believes "that any person who signs up for a Disney+ account, even free trials that are not extended beyond the trial period, will have forever waived the right to a jury trial enjoyed by them and any future estate to which they are associated ... no matter how far removed from use of the Disney+ streaming service, including personal injury and wrongful death claims ... This argument borders on the surreal."

By Robert Brodsky

robert.brodsky@newsday.com@BrodskyRobert

Robert Brodsky is a breaking news reporter who has worked at Newsday since 2011. He is a Queens College and American University alum.