Doctor Dies From Allergic Reaction After Raglan Road Meal at Disney Springs

[walt34]

If true, and if the incident is traced to Raglan, then Disney definitely has some real liability here, they are not just a landlord, as i had been assuming.

If it is just the training that Disney provided, it would still need to be established that a failure in training contributed to the incident. I've not yet seen an explanation how the allergens actually ended up in the food. Human error? Bad processes? Mistakes in packaging? Not sure what Disney did and did not have control over.

 

[HopperFan]

If it is just the training that Disney provided, it would still need to be established that a failure in training contributed to the incident.

I've never heard that Disney trains third party staff. It may be that Disney offers training seminars much like it does to CMs and businesses etc. (DD took a seminar for free while CM that Disney offered to businesses for $$$). But even if there were training and it were required ... I doubt that Disney has any input into their kitchen operations.

I've not yet seen an explanation how the allergens actually ended up in the food. Human error? Bad processes? Mistakes in packaging? Not sure what Disney did and did not have control over.

I agree and how did SO MANY allergens end up in her system? Was if from the Raglan food or elsewhere? Does Raglan even keep all those items in their kitchen? If they don't then major questions arise especially given the timeline.

 

[RivShore]

If it is just the training that Disney provided, it would still need to be established that a failure in training contributed to the incident. I've not yet seen an explanation how the allergens actually ended up in the food. Human error? Bad processes? Mistakes in packaging? Not sure what Disney did and did not have control over.

Sure plenty of open questions still but they are much more than just a landlord (which is what I had assumed).

 

[walt34]

Sure plenty of open questions still but they are much more than just a landlord (which is what I had assumed).

If you have any source for 'much more than just a landlord' could you please share it? I'd be quite interested.

 

[tom1944]

Biggest question for me is how the plaintiff proves the allergen was a result of eating at this specific restaurant.

 

[RivShore]

If you have any source for 'much more than just a landlord' could you please share it? I'd be quite interested.

The only source I have is a random internet poster, that should be plenty in today's wacky world! LOL

I am just referring to the fact that, if Disney in fact trained Raglan kitchen employees on allergens, that is much different relationship legally than just a landlord relationship, which is all I have seen Disney referred to here.

 

[HopperFan]

If you have any source for 'much more than just a landlord' could you please share it? I'd be quite interested.

The only source I have is a random internet poster, that should be plenty in today's wacky world! LOL

Well okay that answers ..............

I think where that "thought process" might come from is that the LAWSUIT is trying to hold Disney responsible (deepest pockets). The lawsuit notes they “had control and/or right of control over the menu of food offered, the hiring and/or training of the wait staff, and the policies and procedures as it pertains to food allergies” at Disney Springs.

That is quite the reach on their part saying Disney controls all of that for a 3rd party owned restaurant.

I am just referring to the fact that, if Disney in fact trained Raglan kitchen employees on allergens, that is much different relationship legally than just a landlord relationship, which is all I have seen Disney referred to here.

But there is no factual information that they are anything other than a traditional "mall" landlord.

To come in to play with that the DISNEY Food & Beverage Union has been working on new gratuity standards and since this lawsuit asking for clear & standard allergy policies across property AND the release of reprimands for tipped employees who have no control of what happens in kitchen.

---

Here is some recent info regarding allergy processes shared by an allergy website to help guests make good decisions where to eat at Disney ... and they don't seem to support processes at NON Disney locations.

Be Advised: Not all Restaurants at Disney are Disney Owned and Operated Restaurants​

Not all restaurants at Disney are Disney owned and operated. Disney restaurants have such a great reputation for being allergy friendly because they have specific allergy protocols in place and very good kitchen staff allergy training.

It's not a guarantee, but with these procedures, Disney restaurants have a very good track record of serving food to those with food allergies. Non-Disney Owned Restaurants have their own procedures for handling food allergies and can vary greatly.

Restaurants in the Theme Parks Without Allergy Menus: There are non-Disney owned restaurants in the parks, including Rainforest Cafe, Yak and Yeti, Starbucks, and more. Look for allergy menus online before going. Some of these restaurants will accommodate food allergies and some will not.

There are plenty of non-Disney owned restaurants at Disney Springs and Epcot where people with various allergies have reported dining safely. However, these independently owned restaurants all have different allergy training and procedures.

That's why we recommend caution when deciding to dine out at non-Disney owned restaurants at Disney Springs, Epcot, or restaurants around the parks at restaurants without allergy menus posted.

 

[DeeBee3]

We do not eat at any non-Disney owned restaurants for just the reasons above. Totally different training and employment process.

 

[Disturbia]

To be clear the restaurant that we were told that Disney trained staff was Space 220 (owned and operated by Patina group); this was from a special diets CM who contacted us regarding the allergies and if we need to talk to the Chefs at each restaurant-we did and placed allergy safe orders up to 14 days in advance.

I’m not sure it makes a difference being that Space220 is in a Disney theme park vs Disney Springs (never been; usually we have Erin McKenna deliver some goodies to resort).

Edit: disboards is super glitchy. Read the detailed response by @HopperFan

Good to know. We will plan accordingly for Maria & Enzo(bring food for our DS).

 

[RivShore]

I think where that "thought process" might come from is that the LAWSUIT is trying to hold Disney responsible (deepest pockets). The lawsuit notes they “had control and/or right of control over the menu of food offered, the hiring and/or training of the wait staff, and the policies and procedures as it pertains to food allergies” at Disney Springs.

That is quite the reach on their part saying Disney controls all of that for a 3rd party owned restaurant.

Interesting...I had not dug into the details of the lawsuit at all, i only became interested when their lawyer tried to claim we all gave up the right to a jury trial because we clicked yes to a thousand page ToS when we signed up for the unrelated D+app.

I would imagine a suit like this just throws whatever remote stuff it can come up with, hoping something sticks to the wall, but those are pretty specific claims. Isn't it possible that a Disney lease would have some very onerous terms for the lessee, especially for a restaurant that has entertainment and participates in the dining plan? Could the plaintiffs have gotten a hold of the lease and any other agreements? Disney wants a seamless experience on their property so I could see them dictating policies and procedures to their lessees business. All just speculation (which is why my post was filled with "ifs"), we will find out more as it works its way thru the courts, I guess.

 

[RivShore]

But there is no factual information that they are anything other than a traditional "mall" landlord.

Agreed, there is no proof, but having been a shareholder and close watcher of this company for more decades than I care to admit, I don;t think a major restaurant lease in DS is just a boiler plate mall lease. I could see Disney exerting some control over theming, entertainment,, uniforms, and menu (if DP participants). Is that far fetched in your view?

 

[Disturbia]

Just read this:

If the unions succeed, guest experience will go further downhill. We’ve already faced increased pushbacks from waitresses post COVID (adamantly refused to bring out pre orders):

https://wdwnt.com/2024/06/wdw-union-tipped-cast-members-concerns-allergies/



And this:

 

[HopperFan]

Agreed, there is no proof, but having been a shareholder and close watcher of this company for more decades than I care to admit, I don;t think a major restaurant lease in DS is just a boiler plate mall lease. I could see Disney exerting some control over theming, entertainment,, uniforms, and menu (if DP participants). Is that far fetched in your view?

40+ year stockholder And on that note I think Disney has some of the best lawyers out there on all levels. Every lease, every contract, every agreement will protect Disney on most levels from the actions of a 3rd party. I wouldn't use term far fetched, I would say that Disney World is made up of many many different "businesses" within a business. Some are Disney businesses and some are 3rd party businesses. All are their own profit centers. More fine print than we could even imagine.

I think Disney brings in restaurants that will fit with their vision, that will be themed how it works for the site and not compete with the others around them, I think entertainment these days is very flexible especially if you look around Disney Springs 3rd parties venues (Edison is an example), I don't think Disney would get much involved in their management, their uniforms or even their menus. I think there is an agreement and everyone sticks to it.

When it comes to Dining Plan, even the Disney restaurants and quick serve are to a degree independently operated and menus created. What was explained to me was each food location negotiates with Disney regarding what items on their menu will be part of the DDP and how much Disney will reimburse them for that item. Obviously the more the better for traffic. Many of the menu changes are not because "Disney" changed them but because the Dining Location changed them because they were no longer being reimbursed enough. An example I use is the Port Shank at Gaston's. VERY popular. But Disney was not reimbursing them enough so their profits were down and their profit goals not met. Their only choice was to drop the item and replace with something with a better profit margin.

I don't think people realize how many profit centers are within the Disney resort community, all with their own management teams. It is a very very complicated business.

 

[RivShore]

40+ year stockholder

I think my initial share or 2 go back to just prior to MK opening so I am right there with you! Youngster that I was, I would check the newspaper for the closing price everyday, then move on to the comics and sports section. It was a great introduction to personal finance, saving and investing.

I would think they would at least have some veto power on things like uniforms and entertainment to make sure it remains family friendly. Your right about menus - probably up to the 3rd party to make their margin targets work within the DDP. There could be some interesting discovery that comes out of this case, assuming it gets that far.

 

[gottalovepluto]

If it is just the training that Disney provided, it would still need to be established that a failure in training contributed to the incident.

Not necessarily. Property owners have lost lawsuits over stupid stuff others did and the only wrong thing the owner did was own the property.

 

[gottalovepluto]

If you have any source for 'much more than just a landlord' could you please share it? I'd be quite interested.

They are so deep in their DS tenants’ businesses the payment system is integrated for goodness sakes. You can pay with Disney gift cards, magic bands- that’s not normal landlord stuff.

I wonder if we will find out if they have a percentage rent situation (a portion of the rent is X percent of sales)? If so, Disney would directly profit from anything sold at the restaurant adding an interesting layer to how deeply connected are they…

 

[walt34]

They are so deep in their DS tenants’ businesses the payment system is integrated for goodness sakes. You can pay with Disney gift cards, magic bands- that’s not normal landlord stuff.

So I assume they'll sue American Express next because Amex was accepted at the restaurant?

I wonder if we will find out if they have a percentage rent situation (a portion of the rent is X percent of sales)? If so, Disney would directly profit from anything sold at the restaurant adding an interesting layer to how deeply connected are they…

How is this material to this case? Was Disney in a position to set standards in the kitchen and enforce compliance? We're they negligent in doing so? These seem to be much more relevant questions to me than how the rent was calculated.

 

[gottalovepluto]

So I assume they'll sue American Express next because Amex was accepted at the restaurant?

How is this material to this case? Was Disney in a position to set standards in the kitchen and enforce compliance? We're they negligent in doing so? These seem to be much more relevant questions to me than how the rent was calculated.

Ehhh.You’re taking details too seriously. It’s about convincing a jury or judge to feel bad and blame the deep pockets. They have lots of leeway. That’s why even normal property owners have to have insurance covering these situations, they didn’t do jack to cause XYZ but it happened on their property, so they get sued. Sometimes the lawsuits stick, sometimes they don’t. Make a case Disney was even more involved with the tenant than simply owning the dirt and that makes it a stronger case that Disney’s has a potential level of liability in the eyes of those judging the situation.

 

[TheDailyMoo]

So much of eating out with food allergies is the level of risk you're willing to take on. For us and our child we have always had a very low risk tolerance...not eating out...bringing our own food to places...our own dessert to birthday parties etc. When we were at Garden Grill last month we mentioned the nut allergy to our server who was nice but kind of a grizzled ol fella and he barked something to the effect of us being the reason they go to their training as much as they do. Again he wasn't being rude but he was one of those older gentlemen that just speak their minds. We pried a little and found out just HOW much training Disney sends them for. And often. And these aren't online classes that can be fudged like some training video some of us are accustomed to at work. That is the level of care we are comfortable with. Disney Springs is not something we are comfortable with even with them being on Disney property because they do not go through that intense training...not that I know of. Even Space 220 we heard some bad stories but we eventually vetted it and we do trust them for a few years already...not that my kid eats anything except french fries there anyway!

We are a part of the allergy community and huge proponents of policy change and labeling and food safety but we are also a little upset at how much negative press Disney is getting from our allergy groups. We DO NOT want Disney rethinking their extremely pro food allergy safety stance. We do NOT want servers afraid to be held liable. We WANT Disney to keep doing what they have always done which is give those adults and parents and kids a safe place to enjoy eating out like normal people with minimal fear of anything going wrong.

 

[walt34]

Ehhh.You’re taking details too seriously. It’s about convincing a jury or judge to feel bad and blame the deep pockets.

Well, I'm not a Florida lawyer but in my experience, those 'details' are quite important. We shall see.