a liability insurance policy”); Tillman v. Wheaton-Haven Recreation Ass’n., Inc., 580 F.2d 1222, 1230 (4th Cir.1978) (“We are of the opinion that if called upon, the Maryland courts would decide that if one party is entitled to indemnity from another, the right to indemnity is not defeated by the fact that the loss to be indemnified for was actually paid by an insurance company”); North Central Airlines, Inc. v. City of Aberdeen, S. D., 370 F.2d 129, 134 (8th Cir.1966) (“The fact that Aberdeen had contracted with an insurance carrier to protect itself from the same risk of loss as comprehended by North Central’s indemnity obligation should not exonerate North Central from its duty to indemnify according to agreement”); Lesmark, Inc. v. Pryce, 334 F.2d 942, 945 & n. 7 (D.C.Cir.1964) (<HOLDING>). Here, the parties’ agreement provides that
holding that insured may recover attorneys fees from insurer where insurer acts in bad faith holding that insured could recover the costs of defending a declaratory judgment action brought by the injured party to compel the insurer to defend but could not recover the costs associated with prosecuting crossclaims against the insurer holding that even where judgment had been rendered against the indemnitees the indemnitees could not recover from the indemnitor without proof that the indemnitees had actually paid any thing on account of that suit holding that indemnitees could recover their attorneys fees and costs from an indemnitor despite the fact that the fees and costs had been paid directly by an insurer and noting that the indemnitor is not relieved from liability either on the theory that the insurer is entitled to reimbursement out of the indemnitees recovery  or that the defendant should not benefit from a contract providently made and paid for by the plaintiff  recognizing that an award of temporary attorneys fees and costs is based on an assessment of need and ability to pay as well as the reasonableness of the fees and costs