Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

Walt Disney World Magic Kingdom Discussion Thread

P. 141: New 2021 holiday experience details released!

Recommended Posts

Why would the parents let a 4 year old grab the tray? So wouldn't the fault be on the parents?
I feel sorry for the child but, this also shows negligence from the parents to monitor the child.How did the parents not see the child going for the tray. I mean seriously? Its ridiculous!.

Four-year-olds can be about as predictable as a driver on an LA highway-- totally erratic! The parents COULD have been paying close attention, and still not been able to prevent it. Elissa does a great job keeping an eye on KT, and Kristen is a pretty well-behaved girl, but even she can sometimes get hurt really quick.

 

The thing that sucks most about this is that none of us will ever be able to have Disneyland Nachos with nice hot nacho cheese again. They're going to be so worried that someones going to get burned and they'll get sued again so they'll intentionally keep the temperature down. Cold nacho cheese for everyone from now on! So by suing they ruin it for everyone.

Maybe they will just pay closer attention to the temperature of their cheese - I would guess the temp of the cheese should be around 120-140 degrees -- who knows, maybe the cheese machine was malfunctioning, and was spitting out cheese at 170 degrees. It isn't unheard of, and shouldn't be dismissed just yet!

 

The cheese could have very well been way too hot and caused burns, and if it was, you had better believe Disney was negligent. I'm no more a fan of frivolous lawsuits than anyone else here, but at least wait for more details before rushing to the corporation's defense like reckless fanboys.

Thank you, my thoughts exactly

 

 

 

It is just as dumb as the coffee suit, which should not have won (I don't care if McDonald's had hot coffee, the person shouldn't have been drinking and driving in the first place, and coffee is supposed to be hot).

She wasn't driving, and I'm pretty sure she spilled the coffee while stopped. Just like the Disney case, don't hate if you don't know what the real story is!! MCDonalds policy, at the time, was to serve coffee at 180*, much higher than what most other people would serve coffee at

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Four-year-olds can be about as predictable as a driver on an LA highway-- totally erratic! .

 

Dude HA HA! What "Drivers" Don't you mean "Parkers" theres so much traffic it never moves! I swear I could live right next to it go outside mark a car, go back inside sleep for an hour and then come back out that car will be right there ! same spot.

 

And yes I agree Elissa is VERY watchful of Kid tums!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait to go to Disneyland this week and eat some ice cream and sue for brain freeze. That's exactly how I feel about people eating hot food. How stupid are people where hot cheese can't be figured out for their kid? Hmm maybe I will touch it with my tongue to see if it's okay to put into my kid's mouth? Nah, why do that? What about boiling water to make tea? Some common sense has to exist in this country for it to still exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Robb, us socalians are not bright people. I was an employee at Wild Rivers Waterpark for 3 summers and you'd be amazed, as I was, when people would complain about the hot ground to my boss. Other popular complaints included being stung by bees, which someone said they would sue for, complaining to management about over heat despite being at a water park which has water slides as well as water and drinks for purchase.

 

The Socalians= Ghost

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure many of you saying it's all the kids fault would be pretty upset if a restaurant served you scolding hot food that literally burned you. I doubt it would written off as "oh, that's how food should be!".

 

Food should be hot. But not scolding hot.

Edited by Jew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's posts like these that all the idiots flock to, and I'm not talking about the ones defending the parents of the child here. We have a justice system in place where a judge will listen to both sides and decide if any blame is apparent and then award damages accordingly. Let it work. Most frivolous lawsuits only take up court time, they don't usually succeed. Let the system work.

 

Also, cheese shouldn't burn your face like that. My 2 cents...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have not read the entire thread but come on!!! If I was a parent and I was giving my child that YOUNG nachos and cheese I am going to test the cheese first to make sure it is not too hot. I guess I think like that because I used to work in a boys and girls club and we served our kids nachos and cheese all the time so I had to test it a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have not read the entire thread but come on!!! If I was a parent and I was giving my child that YOUNG nachos and cheese I am going to test the cheese first to make sure it is not too hot.

 

Then at the very least you (and many other people responding) should read the first post of the thread to learn how the child got burned, so that your comment will have some relevance. Sheesh!

Edited by larrygator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excuse me for feeling compelled to repeat something I said earlier:

 

My main point is that it's a little premature to make any sort of judgment about the case until all the facts are known.

 

Threads about lawsuits involving theme parks and injuries tend to get a little out of control. Let's keep the tone civil, everybody.

 

Yes, I'm repeating myself--again. This is why I hate "lawsuit" threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point, all I can say is that this is a very unfortunate incident. That looks like it hurt. As far as negligence and such - we definitely don't have enough information to judge (plus - we aren't judges .)

 

As far as the Small World incident - I'm sure that there are some serious ADA rules about that. Once again, not being a judge or lawyer - can't really comment on any legal aspect about a case. I can say, although I don't hate It's a Small World - 40 minutes of that song would probably drive me a bit psychotic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was trapped on Pirates during a breakdown for an extended period. Right next to the banjo player. We couldn't exit the boat, and we waited it out. It never eve occured me to sue because I had to wait. Filing a lawsuit over losing a little bit of time? That should be tossed out. The injury to the child is another matter. I doubt we will ever know the outcome though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's hot, and then there's burn your tonsils off hot. We don't really know just *how* hot it was. I think many of the people posting in this thread are being presumptuous at this point. Is a copy of the suit available online somewhere?

 

Since it happened last March, I wonder if the statute of limitations is 12 months?

 

Not sure on Florida's Statute, but it's probably 12 months. The parents are just probably protecting their interests, should they need to file suit before the statute runs. My guess is that they have been working with Disney (who administers claims through a TPA), in settlement before it gets that far. Another guess, is that they're having issues with trying to resolve amounts for permanent disability, possible permanent scarring, etc. Or, that there's a good liability argument on Disney's side, that the report isn't privy too. Perhaps the cheese is within the manufacturer's recommended temperature for serving, and it's been tendered to the manufacturer for defense of the claim, and they're sitting on settling. Trust me, I've been there before, and handled too many claims like this. Nothing is black and white. It's all varying shades of grey. And that's without putting monetary limits on anything.

 

There's some serious flawed thinking on both sides of arguments posted here. Unless you have full knowledge of the legal liability system, and all aspects to the claim.......it's best to sit back and remain an observer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have not read the entire thread but come on!!! If I was a parent and I was giving my child that YOUNG nachos and cheese I am going to test the cheese first to make sure it is not too hot.

 

Then at the very least you (and many other people responding) should read the first post of the thread to learn how the child got burned, so that your comment will have some relevance. Sheesh!

 

 

You are right, I apologize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel bad for the kids, I really do, but it pisses me off that the parents are suing for emotional distress. Guess what? Disney screwed up, I will admit that, but they hurt your child, not you. It's not like someone threw a flaming bowl of nacho cheese at the kid, he grabbed it and spilled it. Secondly, I am pretty surprised this happened at all, especially at a Disney park. I was a CM over the summer at DCA and worked at Taste Pilot. Our lead would check the temperature gauges of the nachos, hot chocolate, and coffee machines just about hourly. They have a notebook with all the gages and have a specific thermometer for each machine, so it seems weird the nachos would get that hot.

 

The small world guy just makes me mad entirely. I understand he was a paraplegic and that Disney should have some sort of wheel chair policy, but they don't for that specific ride. It seems VERY strange they don't, however, considering just about every ride I can think of(besides the subs) is completely wheel chair accessible. In fact, aren't there "wheelchair boats" like there are on the Grand Fiesta Tour, which is also a boat ride? Disney has some of the best lawyers in the world, so although they may get a fine for not being wheelchair accessible, he hasn't got a chance with emotional distress.

 

In short Disney owes some money to the four year old for medical treatment and probably a little bit of money for emotional distress on his behalf, but not on the parents behalf. I guess it makes me mad about the guy in the wheelchair, it sucks what happened to you, but I got stuck on Tatso for 45 minutes, was given a front of the line pass for a reride, a food voucher, and a water bottle and I went to guest relations and commended them for the customer service given to us for being stuck on the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to get slammed in these threads however I do have a few thoughts. First I'm not going to even touch on the Small World situation, ADA cases tend to be complex and I don't feel as though I have the knowledge to comment.

 

As for the nacho cheese situation, looking at the little bit of information on the web as well as the picture that was posted I'm pretty sure I would represent that kid. Those look like some serious burns, and that child likely is going to have some lasting scarring. Burns to the face are going to be worse then burns on other parts of the body because you can't easily hide those and they can have an impact on the emotional health of the child. As far as if Disney was negligent, I can't really say since I don't know the exact facts of the case. However if the cheese was hot enough to cause serious burns I think there is a good chance that it was hotter than it needed to be. I would argue that this cup of cheese was placed on a food tray in a public area, and therefore it is foreseeable that a person would grab the tray and spill the cup of cheese on themselves. It's not like this kid got into a restricted area and climbed into a tub of napalm-like cheese, this was on a tray in a public area.

 

I think this could very possibly be a strong case. Of course I don't know a lot of the more important facts, however I do know that a 4 year old kid was hurt and that enough would have me worried if I were Disney. If I was the attorney I would be sure to have that kid in the room during the trial and make sure that the jury was looking at him the entire time, that would be some powerful stuff and could really turn the case. With that said the most likely outcome is going to be the out of court settlement. Out of every 100 cases that are filed only 2-3 actually make it all the way to trial. Plus Disney doesn't want this trial, things like this can tarnish an image, so they should be pretty willing to settle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure on Florida's Statute, but it's probably 12 months. The parents are just probably protecting their interests, should they need to file suit before the statute runs. My guess is that they have been working with Disney (who administers claims through a TPA), in settlement before it gets that far. Another guess, is that they're having issues with trying to resolve amounts for permanent disability, possible permanent scarring, etc. Or, that there's a good liability argument on Disney's side, that the report isn't privy too. Perhaps the cheese is within the manufacturer's recommended temperature for serving, and it's been tendered to the manufacturer for defense of the claim, and they're sitting on settling. Trust me, I've been there before, and handled too many claims like this. Nothing is black and white. It's all varying shades of grey. And that's without putting monetary limits on anything.

 

There's some serious flawed thinking on both sides of arguments posted here. Unless you have full knowledge of the legal liability system, and all aspects to the claim.......it's best to sit back and remain an observer.

 

I tend to get slammed in these threads however I do have a few thoughts. First I'm not going to even touch on the Small World situation, ADA cases tend to be complex and I don't feel as though I have the knowledge to comment.

 

As for the nacho cheese situation, looking at the little bit of information on the web as well as the picture that was posted I'm pretty sure I would represent that kid. Those look like some serious burns, and that child likely is going to have some lasting scarring. Burns to the face are going to be worse then burns on other parts of the body because you can't easily hide those and they can have an impact on the emotional health of the child. As far as if Disney was negligent, I can't really say since I don't know the exact facts of the case. However if the cheese was hot enough to cause serious burns I think there is a good chance that it was hotter than it needed to be. I would argue that this cup of cheese was placed on a food tray in a public area, and therefore it is foreseeable that a person would grab the tray and spill the cup of cheese on themselves. It's not like this kid got into a restricted area and climbed into a tub of napalm-like cheese, this was on a tray in a public area.

 

I think this could very possibly be a strong case. Of course I don't know a lot of the more important facts, however I do know that a 4 year old kid was hurt and that enough would have me worried if I were Disney. If I was the attorney I would be sure to have that kid in the room during the trial and make sure that the jury was looking at him the entire time, that would be some powerful stuff and could really turn the case. With that said the most likely outcome is going to be the out of court settlement. Out of every 100 cases that are filed only 2-3 actually make it all the way to trial. Plus Disney doesn't want this trial, things like this can tarnish an image, so they should be pretty willing to settle.

Sheesh, what do you guys know about this kind of stuff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I don't think the parents are surprised that the Nacho cheese was hot, I think the problem rather is how hot the cheese was and the fact that cheese was left in a place where a child could easily pull it over. Even if the parents were watching the child (which they very possibly were) they may not have been able to react fast enough. Disney has a duty to keep their parks safe. It is foreseeable that a young child may be at a Disney park and if they are going to put superheated cheese within the reach of a child then I think they did breach that duty. As I said before just on its face this seems like a fairly strong case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/