With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". had at least an equal, if not a superior, knowledge of the nature and degree of the threat posed by McDonald and consequently had an equal or greater degree of foreseeability. See id. (proprietor lacked superior knowledge of threat posed by drunk customer where neither knew of perpetrator’s propensity for violence and both knew that customer was drunk and cursing and harassing customers); Johnson v. Atlanta Housing Auth., 243 Ga. App. 157, 160 (2) (532 SE2d 701) (2000) (where plaintiff knew of dangers in sitting on a bench at night in front of public housing where prior shootings had occurred on the block, his knowledge of the danger was at least equal to that of housing authority, precluding recovery); Griffin v. AAA Auto Club South, Inc., 221 Ga. App. 1, 2-3 (1) (470 SE2d 474) (1996) (<HOLDING>). Thus, Ratliff cannot establish superior

A: holding as a matter of law that employer could not reasonably foresee employees boyfriends actions in shooting her even though employee had informed employer two days earlier that he posed a threat
B: holding that injured employee failed to state a claim under pwdcra even though he informed his employer that he could return to work in two months
C: holding that where employee gave notice to employer of injury and employer told employee that nothing could be done for him through workmans compensation employer had breached statute and was liable for medical treatment which was reasonable and necessary to restore employee to maximum usefulness
D: holding that an employees private arbitration agreement with her employer precluded her from filing suit against the employer under the adea
A.