With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Bartholomew properly contested Gutzmore’s claim of exemption. The Alabama Supreme court has held that “a contest is the exclusive method of preserving a levy after a claim of exemption is filed, Kennedy v. Smith, 99 Ala. 83, 11 So. 665 (1892); and that a claim of exemption, unless properly contested, must be upheld and the levy or other process released. Totten & Bros. v. Sale & Co., 72 Ala. 488 (1883); Poole v. Griffith, 216 Ala. 120, 112 So. 447 (1927).” Ex parte Avery, 514 So.2d 1380, 1381 (Ala. 1987). Section 6-10-25, Ala.Code 1975, provides the method that must be followed in order to contest a claim of exemption from garnishment. Section 6-10-25 provides, in pertinent part: “A plaintiff, in person or by his or her agent or attorney, may contest a claim of exemption after 1997) (<HOLDING>). Because Bartholomew did not properly contest

A: holding that  1823e does not apply to a claim relating to a letter of credit a letter of credit is a liability not an asset
B: holding that one letter sent a year prior to the filing of a motion to compel was insufficient to satisfy the requirement to confer
C: holding that an unsworn letter was insufficient to contest a claim of exemption
D: holding that notice of judgment was insufficient
C.