Sacramento Car Accident Results From Horse and Car Collisions, Part 2 of 2

The following blog entry is written to illustrate how a car accident lawsuit might follow. Reviewing this kind of case should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.

(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)

Plaintiffs alleged the tiger had frightened the Surelys’ horse, causing it to run out into the road and collide with decedent’s car. Plaintiffs further alleged that the Camerons were negligent in renting their mobile home to a couple with over 20 wild cats, without having obtained a required conditional use permit from the County, without having run a thorough background check on the renters, and without having insisted that the renters install adequate facilities for housing the animals. It was learned that, prior to the accident, a lynx had also escaped from the property. An inspection by the Fish & Game Department found numerous code violations with regard to how the animals were being housed.

The Surelys argued that it was the tiger that frightened the horse which resulted in the accident.

The Camerons argued that there was no evidence connecting the tiger to the escape of the horse. No witnesses observed the tiger in the vicinity of the Surelys’ property around the time of the accident. The Camerons’ animal tracking expert inspected the paw print on the Surelys’ fence post and concluded that it was from a large dog. A Fish & Game warden inspected the post and concluded that it was from a large cat, but that it appeared to be smaller than the paw of the tiger that had escaped.

There was an issue as to the Camerons’ insurance coverage. Their carrier defended the case under a reservation of rights, and the Camerons filed a cross-complaint against their insurance broker, cross-defendant Brian Deven of cross-defendant Deven Group. The Camerons claimed the broker negligently failed to obtain umbrella coverage and a policy covering the mobile home.

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

As part of the settlement with plaintiffs, the Camerons dismissed the cross-complaint.


According to Plaintiff: Death.


According to Plaintiff: $2.7 million to $2.9 million loss of financial support.

Verdict/Judgment: Settlement
Verdict/Judgment Amount: $2,000,000
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Contact Information