With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Collins’s injuries that have not been determined either through prior litigation or through a stipulation. Although the rental exclusion may ultimately be determined to be applicable, its applicability cannot be determined without factual inquiry by the court. Such an inquiry into the relationship between Collins and Garcia in this proceeding would draw the insured into litigation of at least some aspects of the injured party’s claim in order to obtain a defense. This is precisely the result we sought to avoid in Dingwell. [¶ 10] Finally, Patrons urges us to consider the hardship to the insurer caused by the withholding of judicial consideration at this point. Patrons contends that requiri 1100 (Me.1990) (same); but cf. Horace Mann Ins. Co. v. Maine Teachers Ass’n, 449 A.2d at 360-61 (<HOLDING>). 6 . Garcia suggests, but cannot at this point

A: holding that as a general rule an issue raised initially in a reply brief will not be considered on appeal
B: holding that in determining whether a state officer is entitled to qualified immunity for  1983 purposes courts may not consider whether the constitutional right was clearly established before determining first that a constitutional right was violated
C: holding that an adjudication on summary judgment is an adjudication on the merits
D: holding that facts established in underlying administrative adjudication could not be considered in determining whether there was initially a duty to defend
D.