With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". So.2d 302, 305 (La.2001); Lane v. Halliburton, 529 F.3d 548, 557 (5th Cir.2008) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1965-68, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)). Thus, Plaintiffs have established enough facts to support a claim for negligence. B. Misrepresentation Louisiana Civil Code Articles 2315 and 2316 provide for the protection of individuals damaged by the negligent acts of others and “[e]neompass causes of action for negligent misrepresentation.” Barrie, 625 So.2d at 1014; La. C.C. Art. 2315-2316. In determining “whether to impose liability [for negligent misrepresentation]”, Louisiana employs the duty-risk analysis standard. Lemann v. Essen Lane Daiquiris, 923 So.2d 627, 633 (La.2006); see also Barrie v. V.P. Exterminators, 625 So.2d 1007, 1015 (La.1993) (<HOLDING>). Under this standard, a plaintiff must prove

A: holding that the same hearing officer as in this case erred in substituting his judgment for that of the pertinent school board in that case
B: holding that case by case employment of the dutyrisk analysis is the appropriate standard in this state for determining legal responsibilities for negligent misrepresentations
C: recognizing contribution in the appropriate case
D: holding that the law of the case doctrine is not a fixed rule that prevents a federal court from determining the question of its own subject matter jurisdiction in a given case
B.