With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". original) (internal quotation marks omitted). 37 When the legislature enacted the Probate Code thirty-eight years ago, 1975 Utah Laws 579-715, it included the following seetion, which has not been amended: "Unless displaced by the particular provisions of this code, the principles of law and equity supplement its provisions," Utax Cop® § 75-1-108. The legislature instructed the judiciary not to infer preemption just because the legislature had spoken on a subject. Rather, courts are to find preemption only where the Probate Code directly "displace[s]" a common law doctrine. At the time the Code was enacted with this presumption against preemption, equita enacted the Uniform Probate Code recognize equitable adoption. See, eg., Calista Corp. v. Mann, 564 P.2d 53, 61 & n.18 (Alaska 1977) (<HOLDING>); In re Estate of Jenkins, 904 P.2d 1316, 1320

A: holding that alaskas version of utah code section 751108 permitted the court to recognize equitable adoption
B: holding that the 1999 version of the sorp like the 1997 version is nonpunitive in both intent and effect
C: holding that parties not related to the child could not file an adoption petition and later prove the unfitness of the natural parents because the child was not available for adoption as defined in the adoption act parents had to be found unfit before petition could be filed
D: holding no state court jurisdiction in an adoption proceeding
A.