With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". with this opinion: By the Court. — The judgment of the Washington County Circuit Court is reversed and cause remanded with directions for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 All further statutory references are to the 1997-98 version of the Wisconsin Statutes unless otherwise noted. 2 Stehlik's blood-alcohol concentration was later determined to be .123 percent. 3 The child was wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. 4 The damages award came to $77 ng that the lack of a statute requiring the plaintiff to wear a helmet meant that there could be no negligence for that failure); Burgstatler v. Fox, 186 N.W.2d 182 (Minn. 1971) (disallowing evidence that the plaintiffs failure to wear a helmet constituted negligence); Mayes v. Paxton, 313 S.C. 109 (S.C. 1993) (<HOLDING>). 9 Our conclusion here pertains to helmet use

A: holding that the plaintiffs failure to wear a helmet did not constitute negligence
B: holding that plaintiffs failure to allege citizenship of first defendant did not constitute good cause for second defendants failure to timely join in removal petition
C: holding that there was no evidence in the record to support appellants contention that the doctor committed a separate act of negligence by continuing to prescribe coumadin and that the doctors alleged failure to correct any previous negligence does not constitute additional acts of negligence
D: holding that the injunction did not constitute a claim
A.