With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". .Id. at 266. 24 . Id. 25 . Id. 26 . Id. at 267. 27 . Int’l Paper Co., 788 S.W.2d at 305. 28 . Id. 29 . Id. at 306. 30 . See Webcon Group, Inc., 1 S.W.3d at 542-43. 31 . Smith, 17 S.W.3d at 597. 32 . RSMo 1994. 33 . McCormack v. Stewart Enter., Inc., 956 S.W.2d 310, 314 (Mo.App. W.D.1997). 34 . See id. 35 . Id. (citing Komosa v. Monsanto Chemical Co., 317 S.W.2d 396, 400 (Mo. banc 1958)). 36 . 421 S.W.2d 229 (Mo.1967). 37 . Id. at 234 (quoting Laughlin v. Boatmen's Nat’l Bank of St. Louis, 354 Mo. 467, 189 S.W.2d 974, 979 (1945)). 38 . Kinetic Energy Dev. Corp. v. Trigen Energy Corp., 22 S.W.3d 691, 697 (Mo.App. W.D. 1999) (quoting Baker v. Brown’s Estate, 365 Mo. 1159, 294 S.W.2d 22, 27 (1956)). 39 .Id. at 698. 40 . Baraba v. Stuart, 780 S.W.2d 136, 138 (Mo.App. E.D.1989). 41 . See id. (<HOLDING>). 42 . See Burger v. Wood, 446 S.W.2d 436, 444

A: holding that expert was qualified to testify regarding sexuallyabused children based on witness education professional license and experience
B: holding that a contractors experience in his profession qualifies him to testify as an expert to reasonable rates
C: holding that the statute qualifies as an exemption 3 statute
D: holding that an expert is not competent to testify as to statutory interpretation
B.