(internal quotation marks omitted)); Mt. Airy Ins. Co. v. Greenbaum, 127 F.3d 15, 19 (1st Cir.1997) ("[U]nder Massachusetts law, if an insurer has a duty to defend one count of a complaint, it must defend them all."). But see Sharon Steel Corp. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 931 P.2d 127, 141-42 (Utah 1997) (stating that because the insurer has not contracted to pay defense costs for occurrences which took place outside the policy period, insureds "must be prepared to pay their fair share of defense costs for those years that they were without insurance coverage" (internal quotation marks omitted)). The majority now expressly overrules the part of our holding in Sharon Steel that limited an insurer's duty to defend. See infra TY 28-29. 8 . See Benjamin, 2006 UT 37, ¶ 22, 140 P.3d 1210 (<HOLDING>); see also id. 124 ("[The insurer is obligated
holding despite authority for the general proposition that the duty to defend is determined based on the allegations of the complaint that an insurer had no duty to defend where the underlying claim was covered by the policy based on the facts pleaded in complaint but other facts not appearing in the complaint excluded coverage holding that the insurer had no duty to defend the insured because the allegations of the initial complaint did not allege facts which would bring the case within the coverage of the title insurance policy 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 holding that an insurer had a duty to defend the insured until it could establish that those claims were not supported by the facts holding that insurer had a continuing duty to defend