There you go again with your personal opinions.
As a “matter of law” the zoo was found negligent.
As a “matter of fact” their insurance carrier refused to pay because of their negligence.
As a matter of fact, the tiger got out of the cage, no matter how you try to spin.
No. It appears business law isn't one of your strong points either. The $18K was a fine, not a liability. Insurance doesn't cover fines.
"As a matter of fact, the tiger got out of the cage"
As a matter of fact, a tiger requires motivation to do something. As a matter of fact, the tiger's behavior upon exiting the pit was that of territorial defense. As a matter of fact, the 3 miscreants were present at the exhibit both before and after the tiger exited the pit. Those facts indicate the miscreants are perps and caused the tiger's mental state, which provided for the tiger's motivation to exit the pit. An exit that has never been duplicated in any way in the pit's entire 67 year history.