George Santos pleads guilty and loses his suit against Jimmy Kimmel; Disney+ membership may not require you to arbitrate wrongful death; the 'Ketamine Queen' is indicted over Matthew Perry's overdose.
I think you mis-stated an important detail about the Disney arbitration argument: they didn't claim that the Disney account TOS gives them the right to arbitration for every interaction with Disney ever. They claimed that the only justification the plaintiff gave to link Disney to this wrongful death suit, which is against an independent restaurant, is that they chose the restaurant based on information from the Disney website. And since they were logged into the site with their Disney account at the time, the TOS covers that specific interaction with the site. A lot of steps in that chain sound like a reach, but not as much of a reach as the media is portraying.
I read them last month. Substack gets to use my IP address to suggest accounts. I was recommended. Corporate executive's substack because we both used the company wifi...nothing else in common.
There is a podcast called Ear Hustle, created and run by inmates at San Quentin State Prison using audio equipment provided by the prison, presumably with minimal anal smuggling.
DC citizen here. Trayon White can try the Marion Barry defense but he is no Marion Barry, which is saying something. He’s about as sincere in his community outreach efforts as his suit is “a sensible choice” for not wanting to look corrupt. Most of us aren’t the least bit surprised at these charges.
Fun fact: A few years back I had a professional occasion to interact with the FBI informant that video taped Trayon, and the guy just screams FBI informant. Total yes man, but with utter contempt for you behind his eyes as he suddenly takes an interest in your hobbies with way too many specific questions. Very weird dude.
Could the Disney motion simply be an example of the Larry Craig effect? They just didn't think anybody in the national press would notice their motion, and they withdrew it as soon as the story broke. Larry Craig, of course, was the Idaho senator who paid a $600 fine for soliciting sex in a restroom and then went to the Minnesota Supreme Court to try to revoke his guilty plea after the story was published.
With SCOTUS giving presidents immunity instead of privilege, does that mean Trump can be forced to testify since he has no 5th amendment right to events in question. Furthermore, Biden can wave much of the Presidential privilege Trump can claim.
Regarding the Disney case, are we sure that they are represented by O'Melveny? I think this might be the motion to compel arbitration, and it looks like it was filed by White & Case:
From the comments I've seen the damage to Disney is more from calling attention to this case which cats doubt in their reputation for being obsessive about allergen safety when informed. If they hadn'tade the argument almost no one would have heard of the suit
About the Disney case: it would be of some interest to have a comment about the degree to which Disney is implicated by being landlord to the restaurant, which served the poisonous (to the victim) food.
While this arbitration thing might not deter people from letting their kid watch Frozen a dozen times this weekend, Disney has some overtly dangerous enterprises like theme parks and cruises. I imagine those have their own arbitration agreements that may be highlighted by this debacle.
I've sort of been wondering why that hasn't come up yet in all of the media coverage, too. It's not like that arbitration agreement in the ticket store's terms and conditions would have been particularly hard to find if the Times wanted to reference it in their coverage:
"II. Ticket Binding Arbitration Agreement and Class Action Waiver
YOU AND DISNEY EACH AGREE THAT ANY DISPUTE OR CLAIM RELATING IN ANY WAY TO YOUR TICKET WILL BE RESOLVED BY BINDING ARBITRATION, WITH THE SOLE EXCEPTION OF CLAIMS THAT QUALIFY FOR SMALL CLAIMS COURT AS SET FORTH BELOW.
YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU AND DISNEY ARE EACH WAIVING THE RIGHT TO FILE A LAWSUIT AND THE RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL. YOU AND DISNEY ALSO AGREE THAT ANY AND ALL DISPUTES MUST BE BROUGHT IN THE PARTIES’ INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES. YOU AND DISNEY THEREFORE AGREE TO WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO LITIGATE OR ARBITRATE ANY CLAIMS AS A CLASS ACTION OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVE OR COLLECTIVE ACTION."
I suppose it might be an open question as to how much an allergic reaction to a meal that was purchased and consumed in the park constitutes a "dispute or claim relating in any way to your ticket." In any event, from now on I plan only to visit DisneyWorld if I am given a ticket as a gift in the future so I'm not bound by these T&Cs.
We will never take our kids to Disney again until they lose in court the ability to coerce serious crimes and torts into arbitration. The risk (both obvious and as expanded by these perverse incentives [arbitration and contracting out for liability shields]) is simply too high to accept. Their withdrawal here is obviously a tactical withdrawal to preserve the ability to use the argument in future. See also Bernstein v US.
Missed opportunity to entitle this episode "The One Where All of Matthew Perry's Drug Dealers Get Indicted."
Thank you, Josh, for your reluctance to give George Santos the highly coveted "Senate Twink Memorial Award for Belatedly Good Judgment!"
I think you mis-stated an important detail about the Disney arbitration argument: they didn't claim that the Disney account TOS gives them the right to arbitration for every interaction with Disney ever. They claimed that the only justification the plaintiff gave to link Disney to this wrongful death suit, which is against an independent restaurant, is that they chose the restaurant based on information from the Disney website. And since they were logged into the site with their Disney account at the time, the TOS covers that specific interaction with the site. A lot of steps in that chain sound like a reach, but not as much of a reach as the media is portraying.
Ironically, to post that I had to click through the Substack terms of service.
I read them last month. Substack gets to use my IP address to suggest accounts. I was recommended. Corporate executive's substack because we both used the company wifi...nothing else in common.
*I was recommended a corporate executive's...
Nary a word about you-know-who. How refreshing!
I am so looking forward to the day when we no longer have to hear about you-know-who. (Not that I don't enjoy Josh and Ken's legal analysis.)
Fascinating show today! I always learn something new from Serious Trouble.
You've now put Billy Ocean in my head: "Ketamine Queen / now we're sharing the same dream"
Minor correction for Ken: the Marion Barry (DC's "Mayor for Life") quote is "Bitch set me up..." -- no "the". Slightly different inflection.
There is a podcast called Ear Hustle, created and run by inmates at San Quentin State Prison using audio equipment provided by the prison, presumably with minimal anal smuggling.
https://www.earhustlesq.com/
DC citizen here. Trayon White can try the Marion Barry defense but he is no Marion Barry, which is saying something. He’s about as sincere in his community outreach efforts as his suit is “a sensible choice” for not wanting to look corrupt. Most of us aren’t the least bit surprised at these charges.
Fun fact: A few years back I had a professional occasion to interact with the FBI informant that video taped Trayon, and the guy just screams FBI informant. Total yes man, but with utter contempt for you behind his eyes as he suddenly takes an interest in your hobbies with way too many specific questions. Very weird dude.
When I was listening to the speech... I kept thinking AI wrote that, and he performed it a la Cameo.
Could the Disney motion simply be an example of the Larry Craig effect? They just didn't think anybody in the national press would notice their motion, and they withdrew it as soon as the story broke. Larry Craig, of course, was the Idaho senator who paid a $600 fine for soliciting sex in a restroom and then went to the Minnesota Supreme Court to try to revoke his guilty plea after the story was published.
With SCOTUS giving presidents immunity instead of privilege, does that mean Trump can be forced to testify since he has no 5th amendment right to events in question. Furthermore, Biden can wave much of the Presidential privilege Trump can claim.
Regarding the Disney case, are we sure that they are represented by O'Melveny? I think this might be the motion to compel arbitration, and it looks like it was filed by White & Case:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25041321-disney-arbitration-tangsuan?fbclid=IwY2xjawEpgS9leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHdeqlkGLfRzmgZQ_7bVby_xyi4JEnai4Xlg7WGyeajc5D5um4lkuUOUFzQ_aem_0ohyhjohaH0lNMVg9PVfWQ
From the comments I've seen the damage to Disney is more from calling attention to this case which cats doubt in their reputation for being obsessive about allergen safety when informed. If they hadn'tade the argument almost no one would have heard of the suit
About the Disney case: it would be of some interest to have a comment about the degree to which Disney is implicated by being landlord to the restaurant, which served the poisonous (to the victim) food.
While this arbitration thing might not deter people from letting their kid watch Frozen a dozen times this weekend, Disney has some overtly dangerous enterprises like theme parks and cruises. I imagine those have their own arbitration agreements that may be highlighted by this debacle.
I've sort of been wondering why that hasn't come up yet in all of the media coverage, too. It's not like that arbitration agreement in the ticket store's terms and conditions would have been particularly hard to find if the Times wanted to reference it in their coverage:
"II. Ticket Binding Arbitration Agreement and Class Action Waiver
YOU AND DISNEY EACH AGREE THAT ANY DISPUTE OR CLAIM RELATING IN ANY WAY TO YOUR TICKET WILL BE RESOLVED BY BINDING ARBITRATION, WITH THE SOLE EXCEPTION OF CLAIMS THAT QUALIFY FOR SMALL CLAIMS COURT AS SET FORTH BELOW.
YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU AND DISNEY ARE EACH WAIVING THE RIGHT TO FILE A LAWSUIT AND THE RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL. YOU AND DISNEY ALSO AGREE THAT ANY AND ALL DISPUTES MUST BE BROUGHT IN THE PARTIES’ INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES. YOU AND DISNEY THEREFORE AGREE TO WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO LITIGATE OR ARBITRATE ANY CLAIMS AS A CLASS ACTION OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVE OR COLLECTIVE ACTION."
Source: https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/tickets-terms-conditions/?msockid=1b9bb5aabd7d65a521d4a702bc80643e
I suppose it might be an open question as to how much an allergic reaction to a meal that was purchased and consumed in the park constitutes a "dispute or claim relating in any way to your ticket." In any event, from now on I plan only to visit DisneyWorld if I am given a ticket as a gift in the future so I'm not bound by these T&Cs.
We will never take our kids to Disney again until they lose in court the ability to coerce serious crimes and torts into arbitration. The risk (both obvious and as expanded by these perverse incentives [arbitration and contracting out for liability shields]) is simply too high to accept. Their withdrawal here is obviously a tactical withdrawal to preserve the ability to use the argument in future. See also Bernstein v US.