This article discusses the Ohio Supreme Court's decision in Lovewell by walking through the case from trial court to the final Supreme Court decision. The case raises many issues regarding the future of litigation involving parties who refuse to settle pursuant to a contractual right. Although, on the surface, it would appear that the court clarified what entity would ultimately be responsible for paying a prejudgment interest award, its failure to address other issues left open the potential for future litigation concerning the traditional relationship between the insurer and the insured. While Lovewell does not necessarily mean the death knell for "right to refuse settlement" clauses, both insurers and insureds need to be made aware of the potential risks of having a contract that includes such a clause.