A veterinarian's professional liability policy purported to provide defense and pay sums for which he was legally liable because of injuries arising out of ".... any malpractice, negligent act or omission .... in rendering or failing to render professional services or otherwise resulting from the insured's status as a veterinarian."

The insured appealed from a judgment that the insurance company was not obligated to defend a lawsuit brought by an employee whose hand was bit by a cat in the office. It was alleged in the complaint that the veterinarian had "negligently forced (the employee) to return to work before a prior hand injury .... had been healed, and did not provide (the employee) with protective gloves for handling animals."

The appeal court found that the coverage of the subject policy was clearly limited to "acts of professional malpractice or negligence committed by the insured as a veterinarian...." It did not apply to business decisions made by the insured such as those involving conditions of employment for employees. Numerous cases in point were cited in this connection.

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

(BLOCK, Appellant v. FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District. No. 91-2559. December 8, 1992. CCH 1993 Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 4084.)