In Bartels v. Romano, 171 N.J. Super. 23, 27, 407 A.2d 1248 (App.Div.1979), the Court again held that, based on an automobile exclusion contained in a homeowner's policy, there was no coverage for injuries arising out of an accident which occurred when a car parked in a driveway unexpectedly rolled backwards and struck the plaintiffs. Bartels, supra, 171 N.J. Super. at 27, 407 A.2d 1248. In determining whether the automobile policy applicable to that vehicle or the homeowner's policy should provide coverage on the negligent supervision claims, we viewed the pivotal issue to be "whether the injury sustained arose out of the use of the automobile." Ibid. Concluding that whatever might be the causative role of the homeowner's negligence, the injuries were a consequence of the use of the automobile, and the Court held that the automobile insurer, not the homeowner's insurer, must provide coverage even for ostensibly unrelated claims of negligent supervision and that the automobile exclusion in the homeowner's policy precluded coverage thereunder.