With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". A.2d 243,1 find that Miller & Gallagher’s representation of Atlantic City in 2006 and 2007 was substantially related to the representation of taxpayers adverse to the City in 2009. The fact that the matters are not identical is outweighed by the fact that all matters deal with tax assessments in which the issue is the value of real estate. The fact that different experts will be defending Atlantic City in 2009 from those who defended Atlantic City in 2007 and 2006 is outweighed by the fact that the assessor is the same person and the Mayor and Council are performing the same functions, defending Atlantic City’s assessments, as the prior Mayors and Councils of Atlantic City. The likelihood that Miller & Gallagher was privy to relevant confidences of the Ass 2ffd 861, 870 (D.N.J.2001) (<HOLDING>); 3 Gray v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., 191

A: holding an attorney who carries on representation of an existing case after a law firm dissolves does so on the firms behalf and any income derived from the case belongs to the dissolved firm
B: holding that under the doctrine of direct estoppel a law firms failure to appeal the bankruptcy courts earlier order barred it from challenging the courts holding on its appeal from a subsequent order
C: holding that a law firms representation of a corporation in a suit relating to enforcement of a severance agreement with the companys former ceo was substantially related to the firms prior consultations with the ceo about the matter that led to his termination
D: holding that a prior suit and a subsequent suit between the same parties did not involve the same claim because the evidence necessary to sustain the subsequent suit was insufficient to entitle the plaintiff to relief in the prior suit
C.