With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". that Ward’s claim is not moot because she sought • attorney’s fees under the Declaratory Judgments Act. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hallman, 159 S.W.3d 640, 642 (Tex.2005) (citing Camarena v. Tex. Emp’t Comm’n, 754 S.W.2d 149, 151 (Tex.1988)); Hansen v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 346 S.W.3d 769, 773-75 (Tex. App) — Dallas 2011, no pet.) (“[A] case under the Declaratory Judgments Act remains a live controversy, even if all requests for substantive declaratory relief become moot during the action’s pendency, as long as a claim for attorneys’ fees under the Act remains pending.”); Labrado v. County of El Paso, 132 S.W.3d 581, 589-591 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2004, no pet.); cf. Devon Energy Prod. Co. v. KCS Resources, LLC, 450 S.W.3d 203, 218-223 (Tex.App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, pet. denied) (<HOLDING>). In Hallman, the supreme court held that a

A: holding that the opposing party must show substantial harm
B: holding the court lacked jurisdiction over claim under  2513 without certificate from district court
C: holding that a partys failure to respond to a legally plausible position in an opposing brief allowed the court to assume the point raised by the opposing brief
D: holding a party could seek fees where trial court lacked jurisdiction over opposing partys declaratory claim from its inception
D.