With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the Code. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Second Circuit has addressed the continuing viability of the exception. Two bankruptcy judges in this district have decided the issue, holding that the new value exception survived the codification of the absolute priority rule. In re Fur Creations By Varriale, Ltd., 188 B.R. 754 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1995); In re One Times Square Assocs. Ltd. Partnership, 159 B.R. 695 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1993). Circuit and district courts across the country have split as to whether the new value exception survived and no clear line of authority 6 L.Ed.2d 648 dismissed, 513 U.S. 18, 115 S.Ct. 386, 130 L.Ed.2d 233 (1994); In re U.S. Truck Co. Inc., 800 F.2d 581 (6th Cir.1986) (applying new value exception); In re Bjolmes Realty Trust, 134 B.R. 1000 (Bankr.D.Mass.1991) (<HOLDING>); In re Tallahassee Assocs., L.P., 132 B.R. 712

A: holding that defendant must prove when the services were rendered to establish that the new value exception applies
B: holding that such a duty exists
C: holding that no complete innocence exception to the doench doctrine exists
D: holding new value exception exists
D.