- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Disney’s about to take another PR hit with this lawsuit response
Posted on 8/14/24 at 4:55 pm to AUFANATL
Posted on 8/14/24 at 4:55 pm to AUFANATL
quote:
Yeah, there's probably a much better legal defense available here than "you should have read the fine print on your streaming service even though that that streaming service had nothing to do with the alleged injury".
shite it’s even worse. It was. “One month trial.” Meaning he didn’t still have the service. They are arguing that since he agreed to something years ago and decided not to continue the transactional relationship that it should still apply to this unrelated case.
They are essentially saying that anyone who has ever had Disney+ cannot file suit against them and must go to arbitration whether you still have the service or not.
This post was edited on 8/14/24 at 4:56 pm
0
Posted on 8/14/24 at 4:58 pm to Dairy Sanders
50k for wrongful death? Something doesn’t add up.
Also, if any inkling of being legit, Disney will pay more in lawyers fees than 50k.
I’d bet the Docs lawyers are asking 50k compensatory and going to go all in on punitive.
Also, if any inkling of being legit, Disney will pay more in lawyers fees than 50k.
I’d bet the Docs lawyers are asking 50k compensatory and going to go all in on punitive.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:06 pm to Dairy Sanders
What an absolutely terrible look. And no way any reasonable judge would let that stand
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:12 pm to Lsut81
quote:
50k for wrongful death?
I’ve read it’s a “sum in excess of $50k”. I’m guessing that’s a threshold needed to push the lawsuit to a different level. And just bad reporting by the NY post
ETA…later in the article
quote:
Piccolo is seeking more than $50,000 in damages under Florida’s wrongful death act, in addition to mental pain and suffering, loss of income and funeral expenses.
This post was edited on 8/14/24 at 5:14 pm
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:15 pm to 3nOut
quote:
agreed. my wife becomes a karen about making sure that the waiter heard 2x that my stuff needs to be cooked separately (she's seen me have a couple of episodes.)
Did no one read the article? They were informed of the allergies and served the food anyway. They know they are liable which is why they want the case moved to arbitration.
The OT’s gut reaction to blame the victim in court cases is misplaced here.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:17 pm to LSUGrrrl
The lawsuit was filed by the husband but the wrongful death is the wife’s death. Wonder if she agreed to the terms or just the husband?
Can’t another relative file the suit?
Can’t another relative file the suit?
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:18 pm to kciDAtaE
quote:
Piccolo is seeking more than $50,000 in damages under Florida’s wrongful death act, in addition to mental pain and suffering, loss of income and funeral expenses.
If found liable, that will be a few million.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:30 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Its a really longshot play by the Defense and some smart lawyering, but they are not going to win that.
Is it, though?
I understand the point of view that the attorneys are “doing their job” and all, but at what cost?
They’ve now turned a lawsuit that wasn’t likely to get much attention into a national story.
They’ve called a ton of attention to arbitration clauses that most people probably didn’t even know existed.
They’ve painted Disney as a pretty slimy company. If they’ll try to pull something like this, should their customers just expect the worst intentions from them?
All over a defense that’s unlikely to work anyway. Even if it does work, surely it’ll get appealed. At that point it’ll become really big story, and almost certainly lead to discussions about consumer protections relative to arbitration clauses and onerous terms of service.
To me it looks like an example of attorneys trying to be way too clever, while failing to see the forest for the trees.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:33 pm to terriblegreen
I think I saw a documentary where the theory was that Covid originated from an orgy with a bat by Disney people.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:34 pm to TigerDeacon
quote:
The Disney attorneys are doing their job in throwing everything at the plaintiff.
The Disney attorneys may be, but Disney PR sure as hell isn’t.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:35 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
some smart lawyering
it’s not smart it’s overly cute and tone deaf
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:43 pm to makersmark1
It was Mickey Mouse and Randy Marsh with a pangolin. I saw that same documentary.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 5:52 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:quote:
Kanokporn
The frick
Maybe from Canada, eh?
Posted on 8/14/24 at 6:43 pm to Barstools
quote:
It was Mickey Mouse and Randy Marsh with a pangolin. I saw that same documentary
I trusted that cartoon more than the “wet market” bs
Posted on 8/14/24 at 6:50 pm to Dairy Sanders
Let them die (Disney)
Posted on 8/14/24 at 7:14 pm to Dairy Sanders
They have good lawyers and unfortunately they are correct. Might not be morally sound but they are sticking to their legal knowledge.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 7:18 pm to Dairy Sanders
Disney is evil, but I gotta admire this loophole a smidge.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News