Wrongful death suit against Disney serves as a warning to consumers when clicking ‘I agree’
A wrongful death lawsuit involving Walt Disney Parks and Resorts highlights the critical importance for consumers to meticulously review the fine print before registering for a streaming service or mobile application.
The family of a New York woman has filed a lawsuit following her tragic death after dining at a restaurant located in Disney Springs, a vibrant outdoor complex in Florida that offers a variety of dining, shopping, and entertainment options, all under the ownership of Disney.
Disney argues that the lawsuit should be dismissed based on the assertion that the plaintiff, the husband of the woman in question, previously signed up for a trial subscription to the Disney+ streaming service which they claim includes a subscriber agreement requiring customers to settle any legal disputes with Disney through arbitration instead of in court.
Such agreements, which users swiftly accept by clicking I agree while downloading an app or a streaming service, are often so biased against the consumer that providing sound legal advice can be quite challenging according to John Davisson, director of litigation at the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
If you agree click here
Legal Counsel and Your Rights
When facing legal challenges, particularly in criminal cases, it is advisable to seek legal counsel immediately.
An experienced attorney can provide guidance on how to navigate interactions with law enforcement while safeguarding your constitutional rights.
Since 1993 our expert legal defense in navigating criminal law matters and protecting your constitutional rights are what we eat for breakfast everyday.
Contact Komorn Law PLLC if you’re ready to fight and win.
Research us and then call us.
More Rights You Should Know
SCOTUS – Justices uphold laws targeting homelessness
Does not amount to “cruel and unusual punishment” under the Eighth Amendment The Supreme Court has affirmed the validity of ordinances in a southwest Oregon city that restrict individuals experiencing homelessness from utilizing blankets, pillows, or cardboard boxes...
SCOTUS Decision Gives Starbucks a Win in Labor Dispute
The decision underscored the principle that only activities that are essential and directly related to an employee's primary job responsibilities are subject to compensation. In a recent decision by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Starbucks received a...
Other Articles
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Confessions
Case Summary Michigan courts issued several important decisions clarifying when confessions are admissible, how Miranda applies in nontraditional settings, and what constitutes a valid invocation of counsel. In Lafey, a spontaneous statement made during a pat‑down was...
Fourth Amendment Search & Seizure — A Quick Summary
Fourth Amendment Search & Seizure — Quick Summary The Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures, limiting when and how the government may intrude on privacy. These protections apply only when police conduct qualifies as a search...
Marijuana Under Fire in Michigan
Marijuana in Michigan is facing renewed challenges as lawmakers push for higher taxes and regulatory changes that critics argue undermine the voter-approved legalization of 2018. Court battles, legislative maneuvers, and industry pushback highlight the tension between...
The New Federal Definition of Hemp
The New Federal Definition of Hemp: Legal and Regulatory ImplicationsCongress has enacted a sweeping revision to the federal definition of hemp through the Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and...
Should courts allow prosecutors to refer to complainants as victims
Labeling before adjudication. Kedero Treasvant was convicted of multiple firearm-related offenses in Michigan, and his appeal raises a key issue about courtroom language—specifically, whether prosecutors can refer to complainants as “victims” before guilt is...
Improper Transport of a Firearm in Michigan
Improper Firearms Transport, Storage Laws and Penalties Michigan law makes improper gun transport a misdemeanor crime under MCL 750.227d. Firearms can be confiscated and sometimes not returned, but attorneys can file motions under Michigan Court Rules (MCR) to seek...
Supreme Court to Hear Case on Gun Rights and Marijuana Use
Supreme Court to Hear Case on Gun Rights and Marijuana Use The Supreme Court has agreed to hear U.S. v. Hemani, a case challenging the federal ban on gun ownership by individuals who use marijuana—even in states where it’s legal. The decision could reshape how drug...
House Bill 5107 – The MRTMA Shuffle
Michigan House Bill 5105 proposes new marijuana penalties and possession limits to combat illicit cannabis operations. Michigan’s Cannabis Regulation Challenges Since Michigan legalized recreational marijuana in 2018 under the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of...
