Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): was notified of the first claims by O’Rourke. By that time, four of the underlying suits had been settled and many other suits were filed with the understanding that they would be settled in the near future. However, many of the suits against O’Rourke were not filed until after or shortly before Aetna filed its declaratory judgment action. Aetna cannot be found to have breached its duty to defend those cases in which Aetna sought declaratory judgment in a timely manner. Consequently, we find it necessary to remand to the trial court to determine in which cases Aetna breached its duty to defend. For those cases in which Aetna breached its duty to defend, Aetna . cannot raise defenses to coverage. See Central Mutual Insurance Co. v. Kammerling, 212 Ill. App. 3d 744, 571 N.E.2d 806 (1991) (<HOLDING>). Consequently, Aetna is required to indemnify 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that an insurer will not be estopped from denying coverage merely because the underlying case proceeds to judgment before the declaratory judgment action is resolved (B) holding that when the insurer takes the position that the policy does not cover the complaint the insurer must 1 defend the suit under a reservation of rights or 2 seek a declaratory judgment that there is no coverage if the insurer fails to take either of these actions it will be estopped from later raising policy defenses to coverage (C) holding that the insurer was estopped from asserting coverage defenses when it waited to file a declaratory action until 10 months after it had notice of the claim and several months after it had notice of a potential settlement of the underlying litigation (D) holding that insurer that waited five months after being informed of occurrence and two months after being informed of suit against insured to deliver reservation of rights letter waived its noncoverage defense (E) holding that a petitioner was not entitled to equitable tolling where he waited six months to file a federal petition after any state misconduct ended
Output (English): holding that an insurer will not be estopped from denying coverage merely because the underlying case proceeds to judgment before the declaratory judgment action is resolved