Lawsuits are settled for all kinds of reasons. If the facts turn out to be the scenario you described, the suit won’t go anywhere. The plaintiff has the burden of proving that Disney acted negligently, which will be difficult for the reasons you stated.
As for personal responsibility, I’ve seen more than my fair share of hypocrisy on that subject, including in my own family. EVERYONE leans toward personal responsibility until they (or a loved one) suffer an injury. Then they start considering things from a different perspective.
Maybe I’m being too strident about this, but a lot of people seem to be awfully arrogant in ridiculing someone without knowing what actually happened.
I agree with everything you say here.
Case in point is the McDonalds hot coffee burn case from awhile back. Everyone ridiculed the woman at first, but she won big time. And, most everyone who hears the whole story, agrees with the jury's decision.
So, yes, until we hear the whole story, you are correct. And, it is certainly possible to create a fact pattern that would indicate negligence on Disney's part. I think the most likely possibility of negligence would be if:
1. Disney knew there was a problem with aggressive birds;
2. Disney knew of a way to decrease the possibility of guest injury (either active or passive method to keep birds away from guest areas) that did not violate any wild life laws/regulations
3. Disney failure to take such action was the result of negligence or willful refusal (as opposed to they devised a solution a few hours before the injury)
For example, with the Fabio incident at Busch Gardens (link earlier in thread), Busch Gardens did put up nets or something around Apollo's Chariot to keep birds away from the coaster to prevent a repeat occurrence. From what I remember, Fabio did not try to sue Busch Gardens over this, so it can only be speculation if he would have recovered. My GUESS is that he would not, as Apollo's Chariot was brand new at the time (I believe it was actually opening day), and he would have had to prove Busch Gardens knew, or should have known, birds were a hazard for riders.