The insureds were not entitled to Cumis counsel in the underlying personal injury case.  The insurer settled the case within policy limits and had reserved its rights only with respect to damages in excess of policy limits and punitive damages, both of which were clearly not covered–and nothing in the underlying action concerning those damages placed insurance defense counsel in a conflict of interest situation.  The insureds’ dissatisfaction with the way insurance defense counsel handled the case did not entitled the insureds to Cumis counsel because, absent a conflict of interest, the insurer has the right to control the defense.