Is Disney responsible for guest safety at DVC resorts . . . They don't think they are at Disney Springs . . . Come on Disney have some class

eleven24

DVC AKV 2007
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
I have to be honest.... I do care about myself more than the non family person next to me.
Of course, as do I. Still, I understand that for even just MY life to return to "normal" the virus threat on society has to diminish. I can't just look at it as a singular effort on my part, but rather the collective effort of everyone.

Hard for me to comprehend that I long for a time where I'd be informed the table at our favorite restaurant will be an hour wait.
 

mustinjourney

DIS Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2016
I'm not sure you read my post.

My post stated that it was classless to say that Disney had no responsibility and that the guest assumed all risks. I said "For my part, I think we all understand there are risks related to going to a theme park..." I never implied that Disney's language implied they do not have to try.
there is no duty to make a place of business absolutely safe. Your duty as a premise owner to a business invitee (theme park goer) is to take "REASONABLE CARE" and maintain the premises in a "reasonably safe" condition. There is also a duty to warn of known and hidden dangers.

In this case -- they are doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing. They are warning everyone about the virus -- and it's potential harms, as well as taking "enhanced" health and safety measures. But even then -- they are trying to make sure everyone understands that they can't make it perfectly safe. It's an absolute impossibility.

As far as the statement "By visiting Disney Springs you voluntarily assume all risks related to exposure to COVID-19" being classless -- I just don't see it that way. They are merely making it explicit for those dumb dumbs out there.

Would you rather them say, "By visiting Disney Springs you voluntarily assume all risks related to exposure to COVID-19, unless one of our employees intentionally or with criminal wrecklessness causes you to become infected"?
 

mustinjourney

DIS Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2016
Yes, we all understand that we are at risk by being outside our homes. I don't think Disney needs to try to dissuade people from suing with silliness like this. People are going to sue regardless. It just seemed petty and classless to me. Why isn't there a sign at the entrance to every park that says: "It's all up to you now, we've done our best. If anything happens here that hurts you or you don't like you can forget about suing us. Food poisoning - not our problem, Hurt on a ride - not our problem. Fall down on hazard or get hit by a firework not our problem. By being at a Disney Park you agree to pay us money and assume all risk. Have a Magical Day." The language struck me as being like this.


Sorry -- I love GIFs.

In all seriousness though -- you're really arguing based on a subjective opinion. You're perfectly allowed to have your opinion -- but that's all it is. An opinion.
 
  • deerh

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 3, 2000
    My question-Is Disney or DVC resorts going to have "Disney Mask Police"? For instance, an adult has his mask off for a minute or two in a line (be it at check in resort or a park) are you going to say something? I think it is going to be a "can of worms" ALL over WDW and it will not be a "Magical Place" for a while.. What if during that short time the guy or girl in line with the mask off in front of you sneezes or coughs and you end up getting the virus from that incident.. I can see it now.. People complain to CM's about people not wearing masks.... UGH! Not the "Magical Place" for sometime I am afraid.....

    DeerH
     

    Mickey of the Villages

    Can't have nice things
    Joined
    May 6, 2019
    there is no duty to make a place of business absolutely safe. Your duty as a premise owner to a business invitee (theme park goer) is to take "REASONABLE CARE" and maintain the premises in a "reasonably safe" condition. There is also a duty to warn of known and hidden dangers.

    In this case -- they are doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing. They are warning everyone about the virus -- and it's potential harms, as well as taking "enhanced" health and safety measures. But even then -- they are trying to make sure everyone understands that they can't make it perfectly safe. It's an absolute impossibility.

    As far as the statement "By visiting Disney Springs you voluntarily assume all risks related to exposure to COVID-19" being classless -- I just don't see it that way. They are merely making it explicit for those dumb dumbs out there.

    Would you rather them say, "By visiting Disney Springs you voluntarily assume all risks related to exposure to COVID-19, unless one of our employees intentionally or with criminal wrecklessness causes you to become infected"?
    I know enough Dale Carnegie to understand that I'm not going to change anyone's mind here. So here goes nothing . . .

    They are not doing exactly what they're supposed to do be doing. They are not supposed to be putting out signs that state something that is not true.

    It is not true nor is it lawful for a business owner to state that someone is assuming all risks (like this). No court of appeals would allow a theme park owner to void its responsibility for a intentional, willful, wanton, or reckless conduct nor would a court allow Disney to not take action to mitigate a known hazard without liability. Disney cannot get its guests to waive their right by a sandwich board. This may be how its done on a parasailing boat in Cozumel but not in the U.S. (even Florida).

    At best Disney's goal is to educate people about the risks of COVID-19 but at worst I believe this sign is a cheap attempt to make folks believe they've waived their rights somehow because they walked past a sign. And maybe, just maybe some of them will wait for a period of time longer than the statute of limitations to file a lawsuit.

    And that is why it is classless. It is classless because it is (1) not true and (2) has the intended (or unintended) effect of making people think they have agreed to something that they could not agree to. The law does not allow business like Disney to have waivers like this. It is classless because it does not represent a high standard of ownership and leadership in a place that welcomes so many millions of people a year.

    You asked me what I would rather, here it is. If you are going to post a sign make it one that educates folks on best practices to stay safe and stop trying to cover your rear end like a go-kart track in west Houston.

    EVERYONE knows that: "There is a pandemic, it may spread through the air or on surfaces, and that being in a place like WDW provides a risk of exposure". Why not make that the sign? Not "assume all risks" sheesh.

    Honestly, who cares right? I'm not sure I care that much frankly, it just seemed petty and small. I expected better.
     

    gwmort

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Feb 28, 2012
    I know enough Dale Carnegie to understand that I'm not going to change anyone's mind here. So here goes nothing . . .

    They are not doing exactly what they're supposed to do be doing. They are not supposed to be putting out signs that state something that is not true.

    It is not true nor is it lawful for a business owner to state that someone is assuming all risks (like this). No court of appeals would allow a theme park owner to void its responsibility for a intentional, willful, wanton, or reckless conduct nor would a court allow Disney to not take action to mitigate a known hazard without liability. Disney cannot get its guests to waive their right by a sandwich board. This may be how its done on a parasailing boat in Cozumel but not in the U.S. (even Florida).

    At best Disney's goal is to educate people about the risks of COVID-19 but at worst I believe this sign is a cheap attempt to make folks believe they've waived their rights somehow because they walked past a sign. And maybe, just maybe some of them will wait for a period of time longer than the statute of limitations to file a lawsuit.

    And that is why it is classless. It is classless because it is (1) not true and (2) has the intended (or unintended) effect of making people think they have agreed to something that they could not agree to. The law does not allow business like Disney to have waivers like this. It is classless because it does not represent a high standard of ownership and leadership in a place that welcomes so many millions of people a year.

    You asked me what I would rather, here it is. If you are going to post a sign make it one that educates folks on best practices to stay safe and stop trying to cover your rear end like a go-kart track in west Houston.

    EVERYONE knows that: "There is a pandemic, it may spread through the air or on surfaces, and that being in a place like WDW provides a risk of exposure". Why not make that the sign? Not "assume all risks" sheesh.

    Honestly, who cares right? I'm not sure I care that much frankly, it just seemed petty and small. I expected better.
    You are legally incorrect. What they are invoking is colloquially called the "Baseball Rule". Over a hundred years ago court cases started to come in from people hit at stadiums by foul balls. Precedent was set that by voluntarily going to a baseball game a visitor assumes the risk that they might get beaned and therefore can't sue over it.

    It isn't a waiver of all potential liability, negligent maintenance of a stadium could lead to trip and fall suits, etc. but the foreseeable risk of getting hit is legally assumed.

    Also "assumption of liability" is a term of art and strengthens their invocation of the legal precedent and therefore must appear i the notice.

    Here there is a known risk of exposure, if there were any doubt they boldly state so to inform the guest. If the guest chooses to go forward aware of the known risk then that guest assumes responsibility for any loss related to a subsequent infection.

    I'm interested to see what suits might be brought. How would anyone prove they were infected by a particular event and not the flight/drive down or a hundred other ways?

    To my knowledge a few cases succeeded with intentional attempts at HIV infection, but I am unaware of a negligence case based on a disease.
     

    Sandisw

    DVC Forums
    Moderator
    Joined
    Nov 15, 2008
    I know enough Dale Carnegie to understand that I'm not going to change anyone's mind here. So here goes nothing . . .

    They are not doing exactly what they're supposed to do be doing. They are not supposed to be putting out signs that state something that is not true.

    It is not true nor is it lawful for a business owner to state that someone is assuming all risks (like this). No court of appeals would allow a theme park owner to void its responsibility for a intentional, willful, wanton, or reckless conduct nor would a court allow Disney to not take action to mitigate a known hazard without liability. Disney cannot get its guests to waive their right by a sandwich board. This may be how its done on a parasailing boat in Cozumel but not in the U.S. (even Florida).

    At best Disney's goal is to educate people about the risks of COVID-19 but at worst I believe this sign is a cheap attempt to make folks believe they've waived their rights somehow because they walked past a sign. And maybe, just maybe some of them will wait for a period of time longer than the statute of limitations to file a lawsuit.

    And that is why it is classless. It is classless because it is (1) not true and (2) has the intended (or unintended) effect of making people think they have agreed to something that they could not agree to. The law does not allow business like Disney to have waivers like this. It is classless because it does not represent a high standard of ownership and leadership in a place that welcomes so many millions of people a year.

    You asked me what I would rather, here it is. If you are going to post a sign make it one that educates folks on best practices to stay safe and stop trying to cover your rear end like a go-kart track in west Houston.

    EVERYONE knows that: "There is a pandemic, it may spread through the air or on surfaces, and that being in a place like WDW provides a risk of exposure". Why not make that the sign? Not "assume all risks" sheesh.

    Honestly, who cares right? I'm not sure I care that much frankly, it just seemed petty and small. I expected better.
    I agree it is semantics, I will just add that the language you stated would not be clear enough for people out there, and they would say things like well yes, I knew it might be a risk if I ran into a sick person, but not if I stood too close to someone.

    Using the word all ensures that people know there could be many.
     

    Mickey of the Villages

    Can't have nice things
    Joined
    May 6, 2019
    You are legally incorrect. What they are invoking is colloquially called the "Baseball Rule". Over a hundred years ago court cases started to come in from people hit at stadiums by foul balls. Precedent was set that by voluntarily going to a baseball game a visitor assumes the risk that they might get beaned and therefore can't sue over it.

    It isn't a waiver of all potential liability, negligent maintenance of a stadium could lead to trip and fall suits, etc. but the foreseeable risk of getting hit is legally assumed.

    Also "assumption of liability" is a term of art and strengthens their invocation of the legal precedent and therefore must appear i the notice.
    Did you read the disclaimer on the back of the ticket? Did it say "all risks" or was it related to just foul balls, broken bats, etc.? Yes, I'm sure the baseball rule is in effect across Disney property for anyone hit by a baseball . . .

    Are you trying to say that this situation is like a baseball game? Because it is not like a baseball game and there is no baseball rule defense available to DIsney.

    Last point. One can never waive one's right to make a claim for intentional torts. One can therefore never waive one's right to "all risks."
     

    Travel60

    Mouseketeer
    Joined
    Feb 8, 2012
    I own a home on a lake. We have a boat dock that we cannot see from the house when the trees are leaved out. Frequently we have boaters think it is perfectly alright to tie up to our dock and play in the water. Usually all we have to do is walk down there and start puttering around and they leave, pronto. Twice, a neighbor called reporting that people from the boats have climbed up on the roof of my dock and are diving off. A lawyer friend advised us that if we do not have a "no tresspassing" sign we might not be able to defend ourselves against a lawsuit if some idiot gets hurt while illegally climbing on our dock. So, we had a nice big red "Private Dock No Tresspassing" sign made. That's all Disney is doing, trying to have a legal defense against idiots who want to blame someone else for their own decisions.
     

    Mickey of the Villages

    Can't have nice things
    Joined
    May 6, 2019
    I own a home on a lake. We have a boat dock that we cannot see from the house when the trees are leaved out. Frequently we have boaters think it is perfectly alright to tie up to our dock and play in the water. Usually all we have to do is walk down there and start puttering around and they leave, pronto. Twice, a neighbor called reporting that people from the boats have climbed up on the roof of my dock and are diving off. A lawyer friend advised us that if we do not have a "no tresspassing" sign we might not be able to defend ourselves against a lawsuit if some idiot gets hurt while illegally climbing on our dock. So, we had a nice big red "Private Dock No Tresspassing" sign made. That's all Disney is doing, trying to have a legal defense against idiots who want to blame someone else for their own decisions.
    I'm sorry about folks messing with your dock.

    I agree that Disney wants a modicum of protection and is working like mad to get the place as safe as possible.

    I just think they could have done a better job with the language that's all.

    :)
     

    Boopuff

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Feb 27, 2015
    popcorn:: Best thread ever... great seclusion read.
    IMO. Disney has a fleet of lawyers who concocted that particular wording. And there’s always a doofus who reads it and shrugs. Even if Disney blared over loudspeakers “You can get covid if you don’t wear your mask, touch nothing, stay 6 feet..” someone would say they never heard it (a woman sued because she tripped when the fireworks started claiming she wasn’t warned about darkness...)
     

    Sandisw

    DVC Forums
    Moderator
    Joined
    Nov 15, 2008
    popcorn:: Best thread ever... great seclusion read.
    IMO. Disney has a fleet of lawyers who concocted that particular wording. And there’s always a doofus who reads it and shrugs. Even if Disney blared over loudspeakers “You can get covid if you don’t wear your mask, touch nothing, stay 6 feet..” someone would say they never heard it (a woman sued because she tripped when the fireworks started claiming she wasn’t warned about darkness...)
    This just made me laugh! Thank you.
     

    GCorbett

    Earning My Ears
    Joined
    Dec 31, 2019
    Assumption of risk does not absolve them of intentional acts. For instance, if you go sky diving, you will be required to sign a release saying that you understand that it is inherently dangerous and you could be injured. If the sky diving instruction punches you in the face, breaking your nose, that isn't covered by the release. Gwmort put it more eloquently above, but this is the example that I use to help people understand what these types of releases mean.
     

    Connect

    Disney News and Updates





    SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY EMAIL
    Subscribe and never miss out on Disney News, Deals and Updates.





    Subscribe to the DVCstore.com
    mailing list!

    BUY DVC


    SELL DVC


    DVC POINT CHARTS


    DIS PODCASTS




    Top