With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". at 621-22. 8 . Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 cmt. d (1965). 9 . Twyman, 855 S.W.2d at 621 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 cmt. d (1965)). 10 . Wornick Co. v. Casas, 856 S.W.2d 732, 734 (Tex.1993) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 cmt. h (1965)). 11 . Id. 12 . Id. at 736. 13 . Id. (quoting Diamond Shamrock Ref. & Mktg. Co. v. Mendez, 844 S.W.2d 198, 202 (Tex.1992)). 14 . 971 S.W.2d 52 (Tex.1998). 15 . Id. at 54; see Twyman v. Twyman, 855 S.W.2d 619, 621 (Tex.1993). 16 . Wornick, 856 S.W.2d at 734 (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 cmt. d (1965)). 17 . See Motor Express, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 925 S.W.2d 638, 640 (Tex.1996) (noting that loss of consortium claims are derivative). 18 . Cf. Browning-Ferris Indus. v. Lieck, 881 S.W.2d 288, 294 (Tex.1994) (<HOLDING>). 19 . 949 S.W.2d at 405. 20 . Id. at 399 n. 1.

A: holding that loss of consortium damages are not recoverable when the nonderivative claim did not result in physical injury
B: recognizing loss of consortium claims
C: holding that wifes recovery for loss of consortium should not be reduced by the proportion of negligence attributable to husband because claim for loss of consortium is independent of the damages claim of the injured spouse
D: recognizing cause of action for loss of consortium
A.