services exclusion” that excluded coverage for damage “due to the rendering or failure to render any professional, services or treatments.” 998 So.2d at 1153. The district court of appeals held that “[w]hether an act arises from the providing of a professional service is ‘determined by focusing upon the particular act itself,’ not the character of the individual performing the act.” 998 So.2d at 1154 (quoting Lindheimer v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 643 So.2d 636, 638 (Fla. 3d Dist.Ct.App.1994)). “That the act or service occurred in a professional’s office is not determinative, the act or service must be causally connected to the professional service being provided.” Id. See also Estate of Tinervin v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 23 So.3d 1232 (Fla. 4th Dist.Ct.App.2009) (<HOLDING>). Similarly in Maryland Cas. Co. v. Smartcop,
holding that wife of doctor who misfiled patient tests was performing a professional service such that an insurance policy exclusion of claims arising out of the providing or failure to provide professional services applied holding that insurance company had duty to provide coverage for churchs negligent supervision of pastor under professional liability policy because policy did not contain clause excluding coverage for actions arising out of a criminal act or licentious immoral or sexual behavior holding that an arising out of exclusion applies to claims flowing from or growing out of the excluded activity holding that assault by employee against customer arising out of dispute concerning services that employee was performing not outside scope of employment as a matter of law holding evidence of apparent authority insufficient where patient sought services of particular doctor rather than services of hospital generally