faith .... there is an acute change in the relationship between policyholder and insurer.”)). If such an agreement is entered into between the insured and the claimant, but it is later determined that the insurer did not, in fact, breach any of its obligations, then the insurer will not have to pay the stipulated judgment. See Safeway Ins. Co., Inc. v. Guerrero, 210 Ariz. 5, 106 P.3d 1020 (2005). Generally, when an insured enters into a stipulated settlement with a claimant without notice to an insurance company, that breach of the cooperation clause relieves the insurance company from any liability under the policy. See, e.g., Smith v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 61 S.W.3d 280 (Mo.App.E.D.2001); see also Safeco Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 71 Cal.App.4th 782, 84 Cal.Rptr.2d 43 (1999) (<HOLDING>). In addition, the NYM insurance policies, as
holding that there is an actual controversy between an insurer and the party injured by the insured 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 if the insured is only partially compensated by the insurer both the insurer and the insured are real partiesininterest holding that insured cannot demand reimbursement for defense insurer had no opportunity to control if insured does not promptly notify insurer of facts triggering coverage holding despite a reservation of rights that when the insurer provides a defense to its insured the insured has no right to interfere with the insurers control of the defense and a stipulated judgment between the insured and the injured claimant without the consent of the insurer is ineffective to impose liability upon the insurer