With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". that a carrier may have an obligation to warn of reasonably foreseeable risks that exist beyond the gangplank. Tradewind Transp. Co. v. Taylor, 267 F.2d 186, 188 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 829, 80 S.Ct. 79, 4 L.Ed.2d 72 (1969); Fleming v. Delta Airlines, 359. F.Supp. 339, 341 (S.D.N.Y.1973). Such an obligation arises where the carrier knew, or should have known, of dangers in places where the passenger is likely to go. Tradewind, 267 F.2d at 187-88; Gillmor v. Caribbean Cruise Line, Ltd., 789 F.Supp. 488, 491 (D.P.R.1992); Carlisle, 475 So.2d at 251. There is no indication in the record that plaintiff was cautioned against sitting on the bollard. The fact that the dock was owned and controlled by the Mexican Government is of little consequence. See Tradewind, 267 F.2d at 188 (<HOLDING>). In addition, it cannot be said that the risk

A: holding term third party did not include an uninsured motorist carrier
B: holding that there can be no common liability upon which to base a contribution claim between a third party and an injured partys employer because the exclusive remedy provision means that the employers liability is not based on negligence so that application of the common liability rule deprives a third party of the opportunity to secure contribution from the injured partys employer
C: holding that premises owner was not liable to invitee who was shot by third party where special circumstances did not exist
D: holding common carrier liable when passenger injured on premises owned and controlled by a third party
D.