INSURANCE COVERAGE: Summary judgment granted where dog bite excluded from coverage under homeowner policy

This case arose out of a dog bite incident which gave rise to a claim. The plaintiff, Liberty Insurance Corporation, issued a homeowners insurance policy to one of the co-owners of the dog while the defendant, QBE Insurance Corporation, issued a homeowners insurance policy to the other co-owner of the dog. Liberty alleges that it settled the underlying dog bite action on behalf of both co-owners of the dog and is therefore entitled, as the defendant’s subrogee, to reimbursement from QBE Insurance Corporation for the amount it paid in settlement. QBE Insurance Corporation moved for summary judgment on the ground that the plain terms of its policy exclude coverage of the dog bite claim. QBE’s policy expressly excludes from coverage any bodily injury or property damage “caused in whole or in part by one or more ‘prohibited breeds of dogs[,]’” including pit bulls or any cross breed of pit bull. The parties agree that the dog involved was a pit bull or cross breed of a pit bull. Liberty Insurance Corporation argued that QBE’s exclusion is contrary to public policy and is “inapplicable to the circumstances of [their insured] as ‘keeper’ of this dog” and because the bite falls under Connecticut’s strict liability dog bite statutes. The court held in favor of the QBE, finding that QBE’s exclusion is unambiguous and applicable to exclude coverage for their insured on the undisputed facts. Liberty Ins. Corp. v. QBE Ins. Corp., No. HHD-CV-21-6143754-S, 2022 WL 16570213 (Conn. Super. Ct. Oct. 25, 2022)