With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". contractor’s negligent repair of a leak that caused mold infestation). , However, a structurally deficient building is an economic loss rather than injury to property. In Pender Veterinary Clinic v. Patton, Harris, Rust & Associates, No. 99106, 1990 WL 10039283 (Va.Cir.Ct. Nov. 27, 1990), the court explained this distinction: In effect, [the plaintiffs] claim that the building does not meet the standard of quality they contracted for, that the building injures itself because one of the component parts, the design, was defective. The damages claimed are not injury to property, but instead are complaints as to the quality. According to Sensenbrenner, they are economic damages for which the law of contracts provides the sole redress. Id. at *1. See also Sensenbrenner, 374 S.E.2d at 56-58 (<HOLDING>). The plaintiff has not alleged any damages

A: holding that article x  2 of the california constitution dictates the basic principles defining water rights that no one can have a protectible interest in the unreasonable use of water and that holders of water rights must use water reasonably and beneficially
B: holding that a structurally unsound pool that caused water pipes to break and the foundation of a house to crack only supported a contract claim
C: holding that corrosion caused by contact between soil and foundation of the house is the type of loss the exclusion for deterioration was meant to cover
D: holding that defendant staying in abandoned house had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the house despite having a key to the house and the ability to let people in and out of it
B.