With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". or 3:00, something like that. Q. Okay. Could you be mistaken about that? A. Yeah, I could be, but I’m starting to kind of wonder if that isn’t the time that the trooper didn’t get there. . . . Because he was pretty late. Karen R. Baker, Judge, concurring in part; dissenting in part. I agree that the trial judge erred in granting summary judgment on Hisaw’s personal policies and join in the majority’s decision to reverse on this issue. However, I disagree with the majority’s ultimate conclusion that Hisaw’s injuries arose out of the operation, maintenance, or use of the underinsured vehicle. That is a question for the trier of fact, and it is inappropriate for this court to resolve that issue as a matter of law. See Elam v. First Unum Life Ins. Co., 346 Ark. 291, 57 S.W.3d 165 (2001) (<HOLDING>). The initial determination of the existence of

A: holding that extrinsic evidence of the parties course of conduct may be considered where the contract language is ambiguous
B: holding it is a question of fact
C: holding the question of whether insurance companys requests were reasonable under policy language was a fact question
D: holding that where the parties go beyond the contract and submit disputed extrinsic evidence to support their interpretations of an insurance policy a question of fact is presented
D.