853
US couple blocked from suing Uber after crash say daughter agreed to Uber Eats terms (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
107 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This case is quite similar with Disney+ case.

You press 'Agree', you lost the right to sue the company.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Show me the lease agreement that says I'm wrong. I guarantee it's much different than a standard commercial lease with more stringent requirements. If Disney is making specific requirements then they have a duty to enforce them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    I appreciate your concerns, but truly: I owe you nothing. It takes very little integrity to make an uninformed allegation and then sit back with a smug look and a mug full of selfrighteousness decrying "prove me wrong".

    Why don't you prove Legal Eagle wrong? It would without a doubt be more fruitful because I'm not entertaining it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] 5 points 2 years ago (4 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Obviously I can't possibly speak as to why they chose to do what they did. But I would assume that making a motion to dismiss due to the fact that arbitration has already been agreed to (seemingly unrelated from your perspective but from a legal perspective is really the only substantive aspect, so wildly related) is far less scandalous than making a motion to dismiss with no recourse for the plaintiff at all and would be far more damaging to their reputation.

    And that DOES make sense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Right, but if they're not affiliated with the restaurant, then the restaurant doesn't fall under their tos, because they don't own it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The restaurant isn't suing them, ding dong. The guy who consented to an arbitration agreement is. Jesus fuck, it is okay to be wrong. I know it sucks. It sucks even more to imagine that Disney might be doing something remotely respectable and have to admit that. But it's okay. I'm wrong all the time. I face it, accept it, learn from it, and move on.

    When you are ready to move on, go for it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •