United v. Associated, 1 CA-CV 15-0564

Dorothy Ahlen exited a Prescott Lakes shuttle van operated by employee Ed Parsons, then fell in a nearby snow bank and was injured about one minute and ~10–12 feet from the van.
Ahlen sued Parsons and Mills Prescott (the facility operator); Mills Prescott had a CGL policy (Associated) and an auto policy (United); both insurers intervened to litigate coverage.
United’s auto policy covered bodily injury from accidents "arising out of the use of an insured auto." Associated’s CGL policy excluded injury "arising out of the use of any" automobile.
United moved for summary judgment arguing Ahlen’s injury did not arise out of use of the van because she had already exited and walked away; Associated cross-moved arguing Parsons negligently allowed her to exit in an unsafe place so the injury arose out of use and was excluded under the CGL.
After Ahlen settled, the superior court granted summary judgment for Associated, holding United had a duty to defend and indemnify and Associated had none; United appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Ahlen’s injury "arose out of the use" of the shuttle van, triggering United’s auto coverage and excluding Associated’s CGL coverage	United: injury occurred after Ahlen had exited and walked away; no causal connection to the vehicle’s use	Associated: Parsons allowed Ahlen to exit in an unsafe manner/place; injury was causally related to vehicle use and thus excluded under CGL	Court: Injury did not arise out of use of the van as a matter of law; vacated judgment and remanded to enter judgment for United

Westfield Ins. Co. v. Aetna Life & Cas. Co., 153 Ariz. 564 (broad construction of "use" of vehicle)
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Johnston, 194 Ariz. 402 (injury must be causally connected to vehicle use)
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Loesl, 194 Ariz. 40 (mere transportation to site of tort insufficient to show causal use)
Farmers Ins. Co. of Ariz. v. Till, 170 Ariz. 429 (injury from unsecured dog in vehicle arose out of use)
Tobel v. Travelers Ins. Co., 195 Ariz. 363 (use of specialized vehicle equipment can connect injury to vehicle use)
Brenner v. Aetna Ins. Co., 8 Ariz. App. 272 (injury from pistol discharge not arising out of vehicle use)
Love v. Farmers Ins. Grp., 121 Ariz. 71 (attack post-abduction not necessarily tied to vehicle use)
Morari v. Atlantic Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 105 Ariz. 537 (injury unloading rifle tied to vehicle used for hunters)
Mazon v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 107 Ariz. 601 (rock thrown from car not causally tied to use for coverage)
Ruiz v. Farmers Ins. Co., 177 Ariz. 101 (car-to-car shooting not arising out of vehicle use for uninsured motorist purposes)
Chavez v. Ariz. Sch. Risk Retention Trust, Inc., 227 Ariz. 327 (students using bus safety features were "using" vehicle)