Widower Voluntarily Dismisses Wrongful Death Lawsuit Against Disney World and Raglan Road

Jeffrey Piccolo has voluntarily dismissed with prejudice his wrongful death lawsuit against Disney and Raglan Road.
Digital graphic with a globe and concentric circles and the text "BREAKING NEWS MDL" Digital graphic with a globe and concentric circles and the text "BREAKING NEWS MDL"
By MDL

Executive Summary

  • Jeffrey Piccolo filed a voluntary dismissal with prejudice in Florida state court.
  • The lawsuit targeted Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US Inc. and Raglan Road Irish Pub.
  • The case involved the wrongful death of Kanokporn Tangsuan due to a severe allergic reaction.
  • The dismissal prevents the lawsuit from being refiled in the future.

Jeffrey Piccolo, representing the estate of his deceased wife Kanokporn Tangsuan, has filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice in a Florida state court, effectively terminating a wrongful death lawsuit against Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US Inc. and Raglan Road Irish Pub. The legal filing, submitted on Friday, indicates that the plaintiff has chosen to withdraw the claims permanently against the entertainment giant and the dining establishment.

According to court documents, the litigation stemmed from an incident involving Tangsuan, who suffered a fatal allergic reaction following a meal at Raglan Road Irish Pub, located within the Disney Springs complex. The lawsuit had named both the restaurant and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US Inc., doing business as Disney Springs, as co-defendants in the case. The filing of a dismissal with prejudice generally prevents the plaintiff from bringing the same claim back to court in the future.

Legal Procedural Conclusion

The voluntary dismissal of this case brings a definitive end to the litigation without a court verdict. While the specific reasons for the dismissal were not disclosed in the immediate court notice, such filings often occur following a private settlement between the parties. By resolving the dispute prior to trial, the defendants avoid the potential unpredictability of a jury decision, and the case will not set a binding legal precedent regarding landlord liability for third-party restaurant operations within theme park districts.

Add a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Secret Link