With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". immunity insulates the State and its agencies from liability based on vague or principled notions [of government responsibility].” Id. at 574, 746 S.E.2d at 565. 34 . Respondent urges that J.H. v. West Virginia Div. of Rehabilitation Svcs., 224 W.Va. 147, 680 S.E.2d 392 (2009) stands for the proposition that the special duty doctrine creates a separate cause of action. J.H. involved a patient at a rehab center who was sexually molested by another resident. First, we note that J.H. is a per curiam decision which does, in fact, cite to the special duty doctrine as a basis to reverse the circuit court's 12(b)(6) dismissal of the case. However, it is clear that J.H. is contrary to the well-established and predominant application of the special duty doctrine. See also Lavender, supra (<HOLDING>). The overwhelming bulk of our jurisprudence

A: holding that the public duty doctrine applied to claims against the town and fire chief for negligence in responding to a fire call although plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to show the special duty exception applied
B: recognizing public policy exception to atwill doctrine
C: holding that the special duty doctrine as an exception to the public duty doctrine was a concept distinct from immunity and did not serve to resurrect an otherwise immune claim
D: recognizing doctrine
C.