With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". not likely” to be able to support herself. It may be true that her testimony, if believed in its entirety, would have been sufficient for a court to find that she was incapable of holding a job. See Allison v. Allison, 160 Md.App. 331, 345, 864 A.2d 191 (2004). On the other hand, her testimony “by no means compelled that conclusion.” Id. The court was entitled to weigh Wife’s testimony in light of the other evidence about her active lifestyle. See Schwartz v. Wagner, 116 Md.App. 720, 725, 698 A.2d 1222 (1997) (noting that prior appellate decision in same case had upheld trial court’s decision to impute income to wife where the wife’s “allegation that she [could not] work long hours because of her health was belied by the fact” that she had endured extensive trave 6, 73 A.3d 1199 (2013) (<HOLDING>). In any event, even if the court had been

A: holding that defendant adequately indicated to officers that she sought assistance of counsel when she stated that she wanted to call her lawyer and officer testified that request was unambiguous
B: holding that trial court was not required to conclude that wife was disabled for alimony purposes where she testified about her disability and offered documentation of her social security disability benefits but where she produced no medical testimony and where other evidence indicated that she was otherwise active and did not stay in bed all day as she claimed
C: holding that a plaintiff could not show that she engaged in protected activity because she did not present evidence that she informed her employer that her complaints were based on race or age discrimination
D: holding appellant produced no evidence that when she made her complaints to management she ever mentioned that she felt she was being treated unfairly due to her race or sex
B.