In Pep Boys v. Cigna Indem. Ins. Co., 300 N.J. Super. 245, 248, 692 A.2d 546 (App.Div.1997), the Court dealt with a similar vendor's endorsement which provided coverage for bodily injury "arising out of 'your products' shown in the Schedule which are distributed or sold in the regular course of the vendor's business." Relying on Franklin Mut. Ins. Co., supra, 275 N.J. Super. at 340-341, 646 A.2d 443, the Court held that the "key phrase 'arising out of the use'" must be interpreted broadly as either "growing out of the use" or "originating from the use" of the product in question. Id. at 250, 692 A.2d 546. The critical element that triggers coverage is causation in fact between the injury for which coverage is sought and the named insured's product distributed by the vendor. The Court observed that, unless expressly set forth in an accompanying exclusion, the endorsement neither excludes claims which are a proximate cause of the vendor's negligence nor limits coverage to claims arising from a defect in the insured's product. Id. at 252, 692 A.2d 546,. Thus, in Pep Boys, supra, 300 N.J. Super. at 255, 692 A.2d 546, the Court found coverage attached under the vendor endorsement in a GLC policy issued to the manufacturer of freon gas, which caused the death of a young man who intentionally inhaled the gas after purchasing it from Pep Boys, notwithstanding the fact that the estate's claim was limited to Pep Boys' negligence and not based upon a products liability theory. The Court observed in Pep Boys, that the actual product manufactured and supplied by defendant was causally linked to the injury even though the product was misused. Id. at 254-55, 692 A.2d 546.