There are liability losses that "blur" the lines between coverages provided on homeowners forms and automobile policies. Sometimes, deciding which policy should respond to losses can be difficult.

In Longarini v. Zuliani, the defendant's dog was unattended in the back seat of his car. The plaintiff was bitten while petting the dog. The defendant had both a homeowner's policy and an automobile policy. The courts had to decide which policy should respond to the lawsuit.

Third Party Liability coverage on Automobile polices insures losses that arise from the ownership use or operation of insured automobiles. An Ontario Court ruled that carrying dogs is a normal use of automobiles. Therefore, losses arising from this normal use must be insured under automobile policies.

The judge in Longarini v. Zuliani ruled that the automobile insurer must respond to the claim for damages. Believe it or not!