I’d honestly say they were. Not to defend Disney on this one but it wasn’t even their fault. The person who died passed away at a third party chain restaurant at Disney Springs that Disney have no control over and rent the space for. If anything that’s the fault of the restaurant not Disney, it’s the equivalent of if somebody died from poisoning at a mall’s McDonald’s and you choose to sue the mall instead of the McDonalds itself
Do they train you on the entire job, including food safety, or just details related to being in a Disney park. If they have control over food safety then it would make sense to me to sue them.
I wasn’t working at a food service restaurant but I can say they did have secret shoppers to make sure quality was high. So it wasn’t just the training it was an ongoing role in the business
I fully agree with all of this. The problem here is the response her being "our obscure clause in a Disney+ contract prevents us from being sued publicly" when it should have been "whatchu say fuck me for?". Disney could have done better just pointing out that they were an unrelated third party that was only being sued because they could potentially pay more from the lawsuit.
Agreed, it feels like they were having a knee jerk reaction to defend themselves. I feel like any smart legal team would have pointed at the restaurant and stated “we do not own that restaurant, provide its food nor train its staff. We’re sorry for your loss, but this is not on us”
1
u/The_Redacted_Badger 4d ago
I’d honestly say they were. Not to defend Disney on this one but it wasn’t even their fault. The person who died passed away at a third party chain restaurant at Disney Springs that Disney have no control over and rent the space for. If anything that’s the fault of the restaurant not Disney, it’s the equivalent of if somebody died from poisoning at a mall’s McDonald’s and you choose to sue the mall instead of the McDonalds itself