I'm surprised that this even needed to be said. But if it's worth saying -- which apparently it is, since the appellant thought it was worth it to file an appeal -- then I'm glad the Court of Appeal said it.
The insurance company provided Cumis counsel to an insured, as required by California law, in light of the insurance company's reservation of rights. Thereafter, however, the insurance company withdrew is various reservations, and agreed to fully defend the insured.
At that point, does the insurance company still have to pay Cumis counsel, or can it simply defend the suit with whomever it prefers?
It's the latter. Which seems obviously true to me. As it did (apparently) to the trial court and the Court of Appeal.
Whether it's obvious or not: That's the law.
