In State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Grisham (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 563, a dog jumped out of the bed of a pickup truck, ran 20 to 25 yards from the truck, and bit Grisham on the leg. (Grisham, supra, 122 Cal.App.4th at p. 565.) State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company insured the owner of the truck (and the dog) under an automobile liability policy. (Id. at p. 566.) The policy obligated State Farm to pay damages that the owner became liable to pay for injury "'caused by accident resulting from the ownership, maintenance or use'" of the pickup truck. (Ibid.) State Farm sought a judicial declaration that Grisham's dog bite injury did not result from the "use" of the pickup. The Court of Appeal agreed with State Farm. It explained: "The truck did not contribute to the injury beyond merely transporting the dog to a place near the injury site. The situation here is similar to where a vehicle merely transports a tortfeasor to a site, and he commits a tort after departing the vehicle. This situation does not establish '"the requisite causal relationship"' between the use of the vehicle and the injury ; nor does this situation encompass a reasonable contemplation of auto liability insurance coverage ." (Id. at p. 568.)