San Diego/ Crime & Emergencies

San Marcos Rear-End Crash Kills 77-Year-Old Man More Than a Month Later

AI Assisted Icon
Published on October 30, 2026
San Marcos Rear-End Crash Kills 77-Year-Old Man More Than a Month LaterSource: Google Street View

A 77-year-old man has died more than a month after being injured in a rear-end collision on West San Marcos Boulevard, according to medical examiner records. William Harvey Cahoone Jr., who was from Hollywood, South Carolina, was driving the vehicle that was struck from behind near the 1500 block of West San Marcos Boulevard at approximately 11:59 a.m. on September 4.

Cahoone was taken to a hospital for immediate treatment following the two-vehicle crash, according to medical examiner records cited by Culver Legal. He died on October 7 at Palomar Medical Center in Escondido, more than a month after the collision. The San Diego County Medical Examiner's Office reported that Cahoone died after being injured in the crash, attributing his death to sepsis resulting from a urinary tract infection that stemmed from blunt force trauma to his neck. His death was ruled accidental, per medical examiner records.

What Investigators Have — and Haven't — Said

The San Diego County Sheriff's Department investigated the collision, according to medical examiner records. Authorities have released no additional details about what led to the collision or whether the other driver was cited.

The circumstances echo other fatal wrecks that have struck San Marcos streets in recent years, though none of those incidents are known to be connected to Cahoone's case. In April, a 78-year-old man riding a bicycle was struck and killed by a Lexus SUV on San Marcos Boulevard west of Rancho Santa Fe Road, according to The San Diego Union-Tribune, which reported the man died before he could be taken to a hospital. In a separate incident reported by the North Coast Current, a 26-year-old man died after his 2019 Subaru Forester collided with a Porsche near West San Marcos Boulevard and Discovery Street; investigators in that case said they did not believe alcohol was a factor.

How California's Insurance Minimums Factor In

California Vehicle Code Section 16056 sets the state's minimum liability insurance limits, and those floors rose at the start of 2025. Under the updated rule, standard auto policies issued or renewed on or after January 1, 2025 carry a minimum of $30,000 for injury to or death of one person, up from the previous $15,000 floor, according to the California Department of Insurance. The minimums also climbed to $60,000 where two or more people are hurt, up from $30,000, and to $15,000 for property damage, up from $5,000. Culver Legal said those liability minimums function as floors, not typical limits, and noted that uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage is often the most important protection when an at-fault driver carries only the state minimum.

What California Law Says About Wrongful Death Claims

California Code of Civil Procedure Section 377.60 determines who may bring a wrongful death action, and a related excerpt from California Legislative Information states that such an action may be asserted by eligible persons listed in the statute or by the decedent's personal representative on their behalf. Per the statute's provisions cited by Culver Legal, a wrongful death action may be brought by a surviving spouse, domestic partner, children, issue of deceased children, or, in the absence of surviving issue, those who inherit by intestate succession. The action may also be brought by a putative spouse and their children, stepchildren, parents, and legal guardians when the parents are deceased, if they were financially dependent on the deceased. Separately, California Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1 provides two years to bring an action for injury or death caused by another's wrongful act or neglect.

Culver Legal, which represents people injured in collisions across California, said it works on a contingency fee basis, with no fee unless the firm wins, and does not charge case costs if the firm does not prevail. The firm's article included a disclaimer stating that the page is not legal advice about any particular case.