With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the Court of Appeals on this question. We next consider whether the forecasted evidence of cohabitation was sufficient to overcome plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. The General Assembly enacted the current version of the alimony statute in 1995. Act of June 21, 1995, ch. 319, sec. 2, 1995 N.C. Sess. Laws 641 (codified at N.C.G.S. §§ 50-16.1A to -16.9 (2009)). The present statute “reflects the modern notions of need as the basis for alimony [and] grant[s] the court authority also to consider fault.” 2 Suzanne Reynolds & Jacqueline Kane Connors, Lee’s North Carolina Family Law § 9.3, at 283 (5th ed. 1999) [hereinafter Lee’s Family Law]. Under the current statute, “[i]f a dependent spouse . . . engages in cohabitation . . . alimony shall terminate.” N.C.G.S. .E.2d 925] 928 (2004) (<HOLDING>). The parties’ forecast of evidence in the

A: holding that disproportionate impact standing alone was insufficient to prove unconstitutional racial discrimination
B: holding that selfserving deposition testimony standing alone is insufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment
C: holding sexual relationship and occasional trips and dates insufficient standing alone to show cohabitation
D: holding that the mere fact that a petitioner took voluntary trips back to his home country standing alone does not suggest either any fundamental change in circumstances or the possibility of internal relocation
C.