With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (16) duty to exercise reasonable care as to the premises, and (17) respondeat superior. The plaintiffs also asserted that their action satisfied the requirements for maintaining a class action and that the proposed class would be defined as Malta Park residents "who entered into contracts of service with MALTA PARK and did not receive the contract services promised by MALTA PARK.” 4 . On October 15, 2013, Ms. Sullivan amended her petition in the Sullivan Suit to join as additional defendants Mr. Schmidt and his alleged insurer, Old Republic Insurance Company, and to add an intentional infliction of emotion distress ("IIED”) claim against all the defendants. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion to consolidate this defamation suit with the Sullivan Suit. 4th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>); Devlin v. Greiner, 147 N.J.Super. 446, 371

A: holding that defendant could not be liable for distributing defamatory statements unless it knew or had reason to know of statements
B: holding that statements imputing adultery are defamatory under louisiana law
C: holding that statement made to plaintiffs neighbors that plaintiff committed adultery was not slander per se because adultery is no longer a crime under oregon law
D: holding that statements in personnel files that would otherwise be defamatory are privileged
B.