What’s Happening with the Disney World Park Pass Lawsuit

Back in October of 2022, some Annual Passholders filed a lawsuit against Disney over the Park Pass reservation system.

This lawsuit was very similar to the one filed by Magic Key passholders in relation to the Park Pass system at Disneyland. But it’s been a while since that initial filing, so what’s going on now? Well, we’ve got some news.

A Brief Recap

First, let’s go through a brief recap of what this case is all about. Two Disney World Passholders (identified only by their initials) sued Walt Disney Parks & Resorts claiming that Disney has essentially breached its contract with Passholders by keeping the Park Pass system in place.

The lawsuit claims that the Park Pass system effectively blocks out even the highest tier of Passholders from entering the park, despite Disney having advertised those highest tier Passholder tickets as having “unlimited access.”

The complaint alleges that Disney has “altered the Platinum Pass and Platinum Plus Pass terms so dramatically that they do not even resemble the original agreement bargained for by Plaintiffs.” (Quote from the Court’s order on the Second Motion for Reconsideration)

Click here for our initial post all about the lawsuit

So What’s Happening Now?

Since the initial complaint’s filing, a number of things have happened. The key things surround the Plaintiffs’ identities.

In a court order on the Plaintiffs’ Second Motion for Reconsideration (obtained via Justia US Law), the Court detailed how after the case began, Plaintiffs filed a motion to seal the case. They essentially wanted the case to be redacted for one thing — the Plaintiffs’ names. They asked to have their initials used instead.

The Court denied that motion and concluded that the Plaintiffs “did not demonstrate that their interests in avoiding the presumptive negative response to the lawsuit outweighed the Eleventh Circuit’s articulated common law right to inspect court filings, which included Plaintiffs’ full names.” The Plaintiffs were then directed to file an amended complaint on or before November 17th.

On November 17th, however, the Plaintiffs tried again to have the issue heard again by filing a motion for reconsideration. The court denied that (without prejudice). Then, the Plaintiffs filed a second motion for reconsideration, claiming they have “new evidence” about the “full scope of negative comments” and “extensive media coverage” that has resulted from the filing of the lawsuit.

According to the Passholders, they have “received a slew of hateful comments online, making them concerned physical confrontation might be next.” They claimed that certain commentary in social media has referred to them as “idiots” and that individuals have expressed a wish for them to be “stripped” of Passholder privileges.

They argue that this will only become worse if their full names are exposed. One Plaintiff argued that she has a minor stepson and doesn’t want him to become the subject of ridicule. Another Plaintiff noted that they have a rental house and feared that their tenants would get heckled by Disney supporters.

But this did not sway the Court. The Court discussed the legal standard that needs to be met for a motion for reconsideration to be granted, and explained how reconsideration is an “extraordinary remedy.” Reconsideration is only granted when there is a change in law, discovery of new evidence, or a need to correct a clear error or “manifest injustice.”

The Court ultimately determined that the nature of this lawsuit and how it’ll attract public attention isn’t anything new. In fact, Plaintiffs had already brought up that fact and Disney’s status as “one of the most recognizable companies in the world” in their initial motion to seal.

Even if the Plaintiffs’ exhibits are considered “new evidence,” the Court determined that the Passholders’ concern about “their reputation or risk of harm does not outweigh the interest in public access to this lawsuit.”

The Court examined the social media screenshots and “news articles” attached to the motion by Plaintiffs. It determined that while some of the comments can be seen as negative toward the lawsuit, the evidence still didn’t tip the scales enough to keep the Plaintiffs’ names private.

The Court stated that Plaintiffs’ “argument is still mostly based on pure speculation.” It clarified, however, that it was not suggesting that a person has to wait for an act of physical violence to take place before they get relief, but the circumstances of this case simply didn’t warrant the “extraordinary remedy” of reconsideration.

The court also issued a warning, indicating that the case was in danger of being dismissed since the Plaintiffs have not filed an amended complaint as they were previously directed to do. It seems that the warning was taken to heart. The court docket shows that the Plaintiffs have filed a motion for leave to amend their complaint and attached the amended complaint to the motion. The amended complaint shows the Plaintiffs’ full names.

So what happens next? Well, we’ll have to wait and see. A number of actions could take place that’ll become critical to this case and to the Disney Company as the legal battle continues. Stay tuned for updates.

For more Disney lawsuit news, check out the links below.

Are you an Annual Passholder? How do you feel about the Park Pass system? Tell us in the comments.

Comments (1)