With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Rowlette v. Paul, 219 Ga. App. 597, 599 (466 SE2d 37) (1995) (noting that “[i]t is not enough, however, that the possessor of the animal has reason to know that it has a propensity to do harm in one or more specific ways; it is necessary that he have reason to know of its propensity to do harm of the type which it inflicts” (punctuation omitted)); Sutton v. Sutton, 145 Ga. App. 22, 25 (1) (243 SE2d 310) (1978) (noting that the proper test is “whether the one incident was of such nature as to cause a reasonably prudent person to believe that the animal was sufficiently dangerous as to be likely to cause an injury at a later time”). 11 Stennette, 316 Ga. App. at 429 (1) (b); accord Wade, 246 Ga. App. at 460 (1). 12 See Phiel v. Boston, 262 Ga. App. 814, 816-17 (1) (586 SE2d 718) (2003) (<HOLDING>); Durham, 234 Ga. App. at 773 (1) (holding that

A: holding evidence insufficient to support confinement where record lacked any evidence of an overt act or continuing pattern of behavior
B: holding stock dividend payable to actual owner not owner of record
C: holding that where both vessels had the same owner it was not an abuse of discretion to give 75 of the salvage award to the owner
D: holding that a dogs behavior of barking and growling amounted only to menacing behavior insufficient to notify the owner of the dogs propensity to bite
D.