With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". necessities such as the beds, bedding, the refrigerator, dishes, cooking utensils, and most of the furniture — all of which figure into the calculus of the circumstances to which Charles was accustomed during Wanda’s life. At the time of trial, Charles had spent $3,700 on necessities to “get back to where [he] could just exist” in the marital home. Moreover, he testified that before her death, Wanda contributed $2,000 per month to their joint checking account. To the extent the $50,000 of property removed from the marital home reflects the circumstances to which Charles was accustomed beyond mere necessities, his $1,136 per month — $13,632 per year — surplus income was inadequate to return him to those circumstances in the year following Wanda’s death. See Churchill, 780 S.W.2d at 916 (<HOLDING>). Charlotte and Trenton rely on Noble v. Noble,

A: holding evidence legally and factually sufficient to support allowance of 30000 when widow had separate annual income of 34161 per year but was accustomed to spending 1800024000 per year on golf tournaments
B: holding that evidence was insufficient to support conviction for vehicular homicide where the defendant was driving 60 miles per hour in a 30 mile per hour zone before the collision and a minimum of 50 miles per hour at the time of impact
C: holding that the maximum statutory damages available to plaintiffs under the fdcpa is limited to 100000 per plaintiff per proceeding
D: holding evidence legally sufficient
A.