With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". expect to incur liability in excess of the SIR amount. Ger-ling’s election not to exercise its right to offer Dorsey a defense left Dorsey to its own devices and thus free to agree to any reasonable, noneollusive consent judgment. The distinction between the rejection of a duty to defend and the rejection of a right to offer a defense is not, under the facts of this case, sufficient to effect a release for Gerling. See Red Giant Oil Co. v. Lawlor, 528 N.W.2d 524 (Iowa 1995), and Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 547 So.2d 148 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1989)(both holding that an agreement to proceed only against available insurance proceeds is not a release of the insurer). F. Gerling’s Argument Concerning “Proper lusia Ready Mix[, Inc.], 436 So.2d 868, 871 [(Ala.1983)](<HOLDING>); Truitt Oil & Gas Co. v. Ranger Ins. Co., [231

A: holding that an insurer was obligated to pay for damages and a loss in value to a water treatment plant caused by the insureds defective product
B: holding that an insurer has no obligation to pay diminished value in addition to repairs
C: holding that unintended damage to a pipeline caused by the defective coating supplied by insureds subsidiary was caused by an occurrence within the meaning of the liability policy
D: holding that insureds demand to insurer was liquidated when insurer did not point to any evidence at trial in support of its contention that damages were disputed
A.