Given the task definition and input, reply with output. In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. The four incorrect answers are other holding statements. You should find the correct option. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.

in defending the action against the insured, unless conflict of interest or other harm is clear and unmistakable. 14 Couch on Ins.3d 202:67-69. Although the Louisiana Supreme Court in Steptore did not expressly address the prejudice requirement, it implicitly recognized that prejudice arises when a conflict of interest exists between an insurer and its insured, reasoning that "waiver principles are applied stringently to uphold the prohibition against conflicts of interest between the insurer and the insured which could potentially affect legal representation in order to reinforce the role of the lawyer as the loyal advocate of the client's interest." Steptore, 93-2064 at p. 4, 643 So.2d at 1216; see Parsons v. Continental Nat'l Am. Group, 113 Ariz. 223, 228, 550 P.2d 94, 99 (1976)(<HOLDING>). A prompt reservation of rights letter serves
Holding statements: (A) recognizing that a conflict of interest may provide the source of prejudice upon which an insured may rely to estop an insurer from denying coverage (B) holding that if an insurer intended to exclude insured contracts from the provision denying coverage for injuries to employees it could have expressly stated as such (C) holding that insured may recover from its insurer any attorney fees incurred in successfully attempting to force the insurer to defend an action against the insured (D) holding that if an insurer denies coverage based on an assertion that the underlying claim is excluded from coverage there is a presumption that the insurer did not suffer prejudice because prompt notice would have merely resulted in an earlier denial of coverage (E) recognizing that a court may rely on matters of which a court may take judicial notice
(A)