A proposed class action lawsuit has been filed against Walt Disney Parks & Resorts and Inspire Health Alliance over changes to the Disability Access Service (DAS) at Walt Disney World and Disneyland in 2024.
Videos by Suggest
The Walt Disney Company parks’ website reveals that the DAS program is intended to accommodate those guests who, due to a developmental disability, are unable to wait in a queue for an extended period of time.
“DAS doesn’t provide immediate access to experiences,” the website stated. “But rather allows guests to request a return time for a specific experience that is comparable to the current standby wait. … The guest for which DAS is being requested must be present during registration. And must experience the attraction when redeeming a DAS return time at Walt Disney World theme parks.”
The proposed class action suit, Malone vs. Walt Disney Parks & Resorts, Inspire Health Alliance, et al., was filed nearly a year after the DAS program was revamped due to abuse, misuse, and proliferation. The number of people who used the program tripled from 2019 to 2024.
The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Orange County, California, on Monday, Feb. 10. The plaintiff, Trisha Malone, claimed she applied for DAS based on a physical disability. However, her DAS request was denied because she did not meet Disney’s newly imposed eligibility criteria.
The Lawsuit Plaintiff Alleges DAS Eligibility Criteria Imposed by Disney Screens out Individuals With Physical Disabilities
Malone stated in her claim that Disney’s new eligibility criteria screen out individuals with physical disabilities. The program allegedly denies them the accommodation required to access Disney’s facilities fully.
Malone further alleged that Disney’s alternative accommodations, which include attraction queue re-entry, meet-up, rider switch, or location return times—fail to provide equitable access and impose undue burdens, logistical challenges, emotional distress and safety risks.
The plaintiff further pointed out that the DAS policies and practices violate her rights to equal access, privacy, and dignity under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). She claimed that it also violates privacy rights under the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA).
Malone noted that the DAS program contains deceptive terms and conditions that contravened the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). She stated the terms and conditions do contravene the California Business and Professions Code § 17200 as well.
There are seven causes of action in total. All of them are California state law claims.