Another day....another lawsuit. This time about a bird.

nkosiek

DIS Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
To make this even more ridiculous, if you read the original article that brought this up, from the Sentinel, the woman is from Celebration. I mean, come on. You live next door and you don't know that nesting birds are an issue in Florida?

 

mercydisney

Is it on sale?
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
I think I will stand on my next door neighbors property and wait to be hit by a vulture (Lots of vultures in neighborhood) so I can sue them. Why the heck does she not have a net over her yard when she knows they are all above her yard!!!
 

marikujawa

Arblover
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Most complaints have boilerplate language in them to overcome that states pleading threshold. All this language is stating is that Disney had a duty to protect its invitee from harm and should have known that birds are a danger on the property. By failing to protect this lady from being hit by a bird they breached this duty.

This seems like a superfluous lawsuit and will probably be dismissed at the preliminary objection stage (assuming Florida has them).
Until people know the facts, I don't know how they can make any determinations about the merits of the case, much less call it frivolous. I guess the idea is never to let facts get in the way of a perfectly good opinion.
 
  • mcurran

    Off to never land...
    Joined
    Apr 17, 2013
    I missed it in the article but where was this? Was it in the tiki tiki tiki tiki tiki room? I hear it’s back under old management so hopefully it’s ok now.
     

    Planogirl

    I feel the nerd in me stirring
    Joined
    Aug 11, 2000
    I got hit in the head by a bird once. It was in World Showcase and I just joked that my hair probably looked like straw.

    I wonder if they'd consider a class action lawsuit? And I wonder how the national and state parks will handle this? So many questions.... :scratchin
     

    marikujawa

    Arblover
    Joined
    Jul 2, 2010
    I think I will stand on my next door neighbors property and wait to be hit by a vulture (Lots of vultures in neighborhood) so I can sue them. Why the heck does she not have a net over her yard when she knows they are all above her yard!!!
    There's a huge difference between a business invitee and a trespasser when it comes to legal liability. But don't let me dissuade you.
     
  • marikujawa

    Arblover
    Joined
    Jul 2, 2010
    You could enlighten us.
    See post #16. I'm not saying there is merit to this lawsuit, just that it may be possible to state facts that would support a claim based on the woman's complaint. Too early in the lawsuit to say one way or the other.
     

    Planogirl

    I feel the nerd in me stirring
    Joined
    Aug 11, 2000
    See post #16. I'm not saying there is merit to this lawsuit, just that it may be possible to state facts that would support a claim based on the woman's complaint. Too early in the lawsuit to say one way or the other.
    That seems impractical. I spent a lot of time hiking in the outdoors and had the occasional spat with a bird. Birds are often very unpredictable and some travel quite far from their nesting areas. Much of WDW is undeveloped and those birds could easily come in and attack at any time.

    As for signs, I guess that I lean toward personal responsibility. I don't think that people can be warned about everything but we'll see how it plays out. That is unless Disney settles just to make her go away.
     
  • JoeA

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Apr 19, 2014
    20 of so years ago I lived in Clearwater. FL and was hanging out on the beach area eating a hotdog I bought from a vendor when a seagull dive bombed me and stole my dog! I was left standing there with nothing but a bun.

    Had I known then I would have sued Clearwater for hot dog money!
     

    marikujawa

    Arblover
    Joined
    Jul 2, 2010
    That seems impractical. I spent a lot of time hiking in the outdoors and had the occasional spat with a bird. Birds are often very unpredictable and some travel quite far from their nesting areas. Much of WDW is undeveloped and those birds could easily come in and attack at any time.

    As for signs, I guess that I lean toward personal responsibility. I don't think that people can be warned about everything but we'll see how it plays out. That is unless Disney settles just to make her go away.
    Lawsuits are settled for all kinds of reasons. If the facts turn out to be the scenario you described, the suit won’t go anywhere. The plaintiff has the burden of proving that Disney acted negligently, which will be difficult for the reasons you stated.

    As for personal responsibility, I’ve seen more than my fair share of hypocrisy on that subject, including in my own family. EVERYONE leans toward personal responsibility until they (or a loved one) suffer an injury. Then they start considering things from a different perspective.

    Maybe I’m being too strident about this, but a lot of people seem to be awfully arrogant in ridiculing someone without knowing what actually happened.
     

    PrincessArlena'sDad

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 5, 2009
    Lawsuits are settled for all kinds of reasons. If the facts turn out to be the scenario you described, the suit won’t go anywhere. The plaintiff has the burden of proving that Disney acted negligently, which will be difficult for the reasons you stated.

    As for personal responsibility, I’ve seen more than my fair share of hypocrisy on that subject, including in my own family. EVERYONE leans toward personal responsibility until they (or a loved one) suffer an injury. Then they start considering things from a different perspective.

    Maybe I’m being too strident about this, but a lot of people seem to be awfully arrogant in ridiculing someone without knowing what actually happened.
    I agree with everything you say here.

    Case in point is the McDonalds hot coffee burn case from awhile back. Everyone ridiculed the woman at first, but she won big time. And, most everyone who hears the whole story, agrees with the jury's decision.

    So, yes, until we hear the whole story, you are correct. And, it is certainly possible to create a fact pattern that would indicate negligence on Disney's part. I think the most likely possibility of negligence would be if:
    1. Disney knew there was a problem with aggressive birds;
    2. Disney knew of a way to decrease the possibility of guest injury (either active or passive method to keep birds away from guest areas) that did not violate any wild life laws/regulations
    3. Disney failure to take such action was the result of negligence or willful refusal (as opposed to they devised a solution a few hours before the injury)

    For example, with the Fabio incident at Busch Gardens (link earlier in thread), Busch Gardens did put up nets or something around Apollo's Chariot to keep birds away from the coaster to prevent a repeat occurrence. From what I remember, Fabio did not try to sue Busch Gardens over this, so it can only be speculation if he would have recovered. My GUESS is that he would not, as Apollo's Chariot was brand new at the time (I believe it was actually opening day), and he would have had to prove Busch Gardens knew, or should have known, birds were a hazard for riders.
     

    marikujawa

    Arblover
    Joined
    Jul 2, 2010
    You can't compare the McD's case with this, McD was directly responsible for the injury that woman sustained.
    Negligence cases require only proximate, not direct, cause. The cases are different, but the basis for both claims was breach of a duty to exercise reasonable care toward the plaintiff, which caused injury. I think I'll just end with the thought that maybe it's better to wait for the facts before ridiculing the woman and deciding that she's intentionally bringing a frivolous suit.
     
    Last edited:

    Hikergirl

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Feb 28, 2016
    Negligence cases require only proximate, not direct, cause. The cases are different, but the basis for both claims was breach of a duty to exercise reasonable care toward the plaintiff, which caused injury. I think I'll just end with the thought that maybe it's better to wait for the facts before ridiculing the woman and deciding that she's intentionally bringing a frivolous suit.
    You are free to do you. There are no facts that are going to change my opinion about what kind of person would sue Disney over this incident.
    I don't believe that any company has to post a never ending list of potential incidents in order to avoid being sued. This woman is a local, she went outdoors where birds live. She wants to sue Disney because she wasn't smart enough to know that sometimes wildlife can be wild.
    Now, if the kind of bird that "attacked" her is some man eating dangerous bird I might see it differently, but last I knew there aren't any of those in existence.
     
    Last edited:



    Connect

    Disney News and Updates

    Get Daily Email Updates


    Top