This case is back before us on remand from the supreme court, which found that an exclusion which it previously held to be ambiguous was nonetheless clear under the particular facts involved in this case. See Paxton v. Sanderson, 00-0587 (La.04/28/00), 761 So.2d 503.

For the reasons set forth in Judge Gas-kins’ original dissent, we affirm the judgment of the trial court granting summary judgment and dismissing plaintiffs’ claims.