A homeowners insured had been providing day care or baby-sitting service for the 15-month-old daughter of neighbors for nine months, while the two parents worked. She was paid five dollars per day, primarily to cover the cost of food and other necessities, for keeping the child in her home. She did not provide care for any other children.

While she and her daughter were mowing the family lawn, using separate riding mowers, the infant, playing in the yard, ran toward the daughter's machine and was injured despite the insured's efforts to reach her. The insurer and the insured sought declaratory judgment with respect to the applicability of the policy's personal liability coverage. The trial court applied the policy's business pursuits exclusion and found that the insured's activity was a business pursuit and that the incident was not covered. The Virginia Supreme Court awarded an appeal from the order.

The insured did not contest the trial court determination that the arrangement with the neighbors was child care and, accordingly, a "business pursuit" as the term was used in the policy. She contended, however, "that the activity of mowing the grass which caused the injuries....was not related to the business pursuit of providing child care and therefore the exception to the exclusion is applicable." The Alabama Supreme Court agreed.

The judgment of the trial court was reversed in favor of the insured and against the insurer.

Editor's Note: The familiar exception under the business pursuits exclusion specified "activities....which are ordinarily incident to non-business pursuits."

(FLOYD ET AL., Appellants v. NORTHERN NECK INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. Virginia Supreme Court. Record No. 920946. February 26, 1993. CCH 1993 Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 4191.)