With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". not actionable as a tortious misrepresentation of facts. Thus, a claim of equitable estoppel lies in tort, whereas a claim of promissory estoppel lies in contract. Id. at 716 (citations omitted). Thus, DeLo-zier’s claim was contractual and was not barred by the CGIA. Id. As Berg and DeLozier illustrate, a claim that is supported by allegations of misrepresentation or fraud is likely a claim that could lie in tort. See Berg, 919 P.2d at 259; DeLozier, 917 P.2d at 716-17; see also Patzer v. City of Loveland, 80 P.3d 908, 912 (Colo.App.2003) (explaining that a claim that is based not on a promised performance in the future, but rather on an alleged misrepresentation of facts is fundamentally a tort claim barred by the CGIA); Lehman v. City of Louisville, 857 P.2d 455, 457 (Colo.App.1992) (<HOLDING>). In sum, these eases apply our general rule

A: holding negligent misrepresentation sufficient
B: holding that when the essence of the claim is either negligent or intentional misrepresentation the claim could lie in tort
C: holding that a ttca claim based on an officers allegedly negligent use of his service weapon was a claim for intentional tort not negligence
D: holding estoppel claim could not lie in tort where the facts that support the claim could not support a claim for fraud or misrepresentation
B.