Disney is trying to keep a Florida wrongful death lawsuit out of court through controversial legal means Company lawyers argue that the plaintiff, Jeffery Piccolo, cannot sue Disney and must submit the case to arbitration

Why? Because Piccolo signed up for Disney Plus and purchased his Epcot tickets on Disney's website

Piccolo is suing, among others, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, alleging negligence by Disney's parks department His attorney, Brian Denny, told CNN in February, “Jeff filed this lawsuit to make sure tragedies like this don't happen to other families”

Piccolo's lawsuit stems from an October 2023 visit by Piccolo, his wife Kanokpong Tansarn, and Piccolo's mother to the Walt Disney World Resort in Orlando, Florida

While there, the three dined at the Raglan Road Irish Pub in the Disney Springs area of the theme park According to the lawsuit, Tan Suan has many allergies and believed the restaurant had safeguards against allergens

The waiter allegedly told the couple that he could make food free of allergens or assured them that the items in question were allergen-free Unfortunately, Tan Xuan suffered a “severe acute allergic reaction” and died despite the administration of an EpiPen The lawsuit states that the cause of her death was “anaphylaxis due to elevated levels of dairy and nuts in her system,” according to the coroner's autopsy

In court documents, Disney is trying to have the $50,000 lawsuit thrown out because Piccolo signed up for a one-month trial of Disney Plus in 2019 Disney Plus terms of service require Disney Plus users to arbitrate all disputes with the company

“You and Disney agree to resolve all disputes (including related disputes involving The Walt Disney Company, its subsidiaries, or its affiliates) by binding individual arbitration as provided below”

The Disney Plus Terms and Conditions are full of such boilerplate language All are sufficiently vague in legal terms to bring up such legal arguments even when there are contextual clues in the TOS

The company's attorneys also claim that because Piccolo used the Walt Disney Park website to purchase tickets to the Epcot Center, the company is protected from a lawsuit by the estate of his late wife

This is the latest in a series of legal moves by Disney attorneys from the case; in May, Disney filed a motion in a Florida circuit court asking the court to order Piccolo to transfer the case to private arbitration rather than public court In its court papers, Disney explicitly stated that “the primary advantage of arbitration is to avoid heavy litigation costs”

In early August, Piccolo's attorneys responded to Disney's claim, calling the claim “preposterous” and later stating in a 123-page document that “the claim is close to surrealistic”

“There is simply no reading of the Disney+ subscriber agreement that supports the notion that Mr Piccolo agreed to arbitrate claims arising from injuries sustained by his wife at a restaurant located on property owned by Disney theme parks and resorts, which ultimately led to her death” They write

Mr Piccolo's attorneys argued that Disney's attempt to bar a customer's right to a jury trial “with Disney affiliates and subsidiaries is so outrageously unreasonable and unfair as to shock the judicial conscience”

The judge in the case, A James Kleiner, has not yet responded to Disney's request or to Piccolo's attorneys It may be some time before this case is settled If it is settled Disney's way, it could set a precedent for both corporate terms of use and those that can be used to legally invalidate them

Disney has not responded to our request for comment, but we will update this article if we hear back