Entertainment Giant Argues Arbitration Clause Covers All Disputes
- Disney argues that a family’s wrongful death suit should be dismissed due to arbitration clause in Disney+ terms of use
- Lawyer claims it is ‘outrageously unreasonable and unfair’
- Family claims doctor died from allergic reaction at Irish pub in Disney Springs
- Disney+ subscription agreement includes binding arbitration clause
Disney is seeking to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a doctor who allegedly died from an allergic reaction at an Irish pub in Disney Springs. The company argues that the arbitration clause in their streaming service’s terms of use should cover all disputes, even those unrelated to the platform itself. The family’s lawyer claims this is ‘outrageously unreasonable and unfair’.
Factuality Level: 8
Factuality Justification: The article provides accurate and objective information about the ongoing legal dispute between Disney and the family of Kanokporn Tangsuan. It presents both sides of the argument and includes relevant details about the case without any significant digressions or misleading statements.
Noise Level: 3
Noise Justification: The article provides relevant information about a legal dispute involving Disney and a customer’s wrongful death claim, but it does not contain any significant analysis or exploration of broader implications. It is mostly focused on the specific case at hand rather than offering insights or commentary on the arbitration clause in streaming service agreements.
Public Companies: The Walt Disney Company (DIS)
Private Companies: Raglan Road
Key People: Jeffrey Piccolo (Husband of Kanokporn Tangsuan), Kanokporn Tangsuan (Family medicine specialist), Brian Denney (Attorney for Piccolo)
Financial Relevance: Yes
Financial Markets Impacted: Disney’s legal disputes and potential financial implications related to lawsuits
Financial Rating Justification: The article discusses a wrongful death lawsuit involving Disney, which is a major company in the entertainment industry with significant financial impact. The outcome of this case could potentially affect Disney’s reputation and financial liabilities.
Presence Of Extreme Event: No
Nature Of Extreme Event: Other
Impact Rating Of The Extreme Event: Minor
Extreme Rating Justification: There is no extreme event mentioned in the article. The situation described is a legal and judicial event involving Disney+, but it does not meet the criteria for an extreme event as defined by the task.
Deal Size: Output: 50000
Move Size: No market move size mentioned.
Sector: All
Direction: Down
Magnitude: Small
Affected Instruments: Stocks
www.marketwatch.com 
