With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level” and have “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007). Generally, when ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a judge must accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, at Appellants have failed to state a claim of negligence under South Carolina law because they cannot establish a legal duty owed to them by Norfolk Southern. While Appellants may have properly pled that their injuries were foreseeable, foreseeability alone may not give rise to a duty under South Carolina law. See Booz-Allen, 346 S.E.2d at 325; Huggins, 585 S.E.2d at 277 (<HOLDING>); Evans v. Rite Aid Corp., 317 S.C. 154, 452

A: holding that negligent breach of a duty assumed in a contract does not give rise to a separate tort claim
B: holding that duty to protect from criminal acts does not arise in the absence of a foreseeable risk of harm
C: holding ejven though it is foreseeable that injury may arise by the negligent issuance of a credit card foreseeability alone does not give rise to duty
D: holding that even though the governments conduct may have been negligent or even grossly negligent it did not rise to the level of flagrant misconduct
C.