With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Pursuant to the 1953 decree, the decreed wells have been operated under the rules governing nontributary wells—ie., they have operated free from the requirements placed on tributary wells that downstream flows be augmented to compensate for out-of-priority diversions. The operators of these decreed nontributary wells are not now free to seek partial tributary status for these wells under circumstances where non-tributary status is no longer advantageous. Although the trial court does not purport to overturn the 1953 decree, its holding essentially amounts to a collateral attack on the initial nontributary determination. Such an attack, even on an erroneous decision, is barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel. See State Eng’r v. Smith Cattle, Inc., 780 P.2d 546 (Colo.1989) (<HOLDING>). The wells adjudicated nontributary in the

A: holding that the doctrine of res judicata barred relitigation of an allegedly erroneous court determination that certain waters were not tributary to the arkansas river
B: holding that because relitigation of issue was barred by collateral estoppel res judicata determination of finality of judgment dismissed for lack of standing was not relevant
C: holding that the doctrine of res judicata applies to deportation proceedings
D: holding that res judicata prevents relitigation of a claim that was previously the subject of a valid and final decision of this court
A.