TOM GLAZE, Associate Justice
On October 4, 2007, we accepted certification of a question of Arkansas law submitted by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, requesting this court to answer whether an insurer can rely on a unilateral reservation of rights to recoup attorney's fees expended in defense of the insured, following a declaratory judgment that determined the insurer did not owe a duty to defend or indemnify the insured. Medical Liability Mut. Ins. Co. v. Alan Curtis Enterprises, Inc., 371 Ark. 240, ___ S.W.3d ___ (2007) (per curiam). We issued an opinion on May 28, 2008, holding that, under Arkansas law, an insurer may not recoup attorney's fees under a unilateral reservation of rights without statutory or rule authority. Medical Liability Mut. Ins. Co. v. Alan Curtis Enterprises, Inc., ___ Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d ___ (May 28, 2008). Medical Liability Mutual Insurance Company (MLMIC) has filed a petition for rehearing and to vacate the opinion, asserting that the opinion was moot because the parties settled the underlying case.
We first note the lack of timeliness to MLMIC's motion to withdraw the certified question. The certified question was submitted to the court on September 26, 2007, and MLMIC filed its motion to withdraw the question the day before we issued our answer. Second, under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-8(a)(1), this court has the discretion to accept certified questions from a federal court when it appears that there is no controlling precedent on an issue under Arkansas law. Our decision on the certified question of whether attorney's fees can be recouped by an insurer under a unilateral reservation of rights established precedent that will prevent future litigation. "Where considerations of public interest or prevention of future litigation are present," this court may, at its discretion, "elect to settle an issue, even though moot." Owens v. Taylor, 299 Ark. 373, 374, 772 S.W.2d 596, 597 (1989). Accordingly, we deny MLMIC's petition.
IMBER, J., not participating.