Opinion ID: 2053142
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Application of the Business Pursuits Exclusion.

Text: The business pursuits exclusion provides that the policy does not apply  to bodily injury or property damage arising out of business pursuits of any Insured except activities therein which are ordinarily incident to non-business pursuits. The trial court found the application of the business pursuits exclusion involved only a question of law, ruled that the exclusion was ambiguous, and construed it against the insurance company. This court recently considered the application of an identical exclusion in Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. City of Minneapolis, Minn., 239 N.W.2d 472 (1976). [2] Just prior to the start of his shift a police officer accidentally shot a fellow officer with his service revolver. The insurance company argued the conduct of the officer came within the exclusion in his homeowners policy for business activities. The trial court found the accident arose out of the officer's business pursuits, but the activity causing the injury  the handling of a pistol  was ordinarily incident to nonbusiness pursuits, such as hunting, weapon collecting, or target shooting. On appeal this court affirmed. While we noted the policy clause should be construed with reference to the particular facts of each case, we also noted the following general principles, quoting from Frazier, The Business Pursuits Exclusion in Personal Liability Insurance Policies: What the Courts Have Done with It, 1970 Ins.L.J. 519, 533: [3] `There seems almost unanimous accord in the decisions that the location at which an act is performed is not decisive on the question of whether the act constitutes part of an excluded business pursuit. Rather, it is the nature of the particular act involved and its relationship, or lack of relationship, to the business that controls. Personal acts, such as pranks, do not become part of a business pursuit, so as to be outside of the coverage, merely because performed during business hours and on business property. In order for an act to be considered part of a business pursuit it must be an act that contributes to, or furthers the interest of, the business and one that is peculiar to it. It must be an act that the insured would not normally perform but for the business, and must be solely referable to the conduct of the business. ' (Italics supplied.) 239 N.W.2d 476. Although decided before Milwaukee Mutual, the decision of the trial court is consistent with its principles. The assault by the insured arose out of a business setting; however, the assault sought to be excluded by the business pursuits clause was not an act peculiar to the business activities of the insured. [4] Thus, the exclusion does not apply.