With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". injured spouse to receive some compensation, especially when the insurance company is the “real” party being sued. Such tension could potentially lead to a threat of corruption. Although the possibility of collusion exists in various situations such as intrafamily cases and suits between friends, the judicial system is adept at ferreting out frivolous and unfounded cases. It is unnecessary and unwise to deny legitimate claims in order to prevent fraudulent and collusive suits because the judicial system contains numerous safeguards and deterrents against fraudulent claims such as perjury charges and modern discovery procedures. Luna v. Clayton, Tenn.Supr., 655 S.W.2d 893, 896-97 (1983). Cf, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993) (<HOLDING>). The conclusion that the abrogation of the

A: holding that hgn evidence is scientific and therefore must satisfy the pertinent delaware rules of evidence governing the admission of such evidence
B: holding that admission of rule 404b evidence was proper
C: holding that federal rule of evidence 702 supersedes the general acceptance rule regarding scientific evidence and that the adversarial process including vigorous crossexamination provides safeguards against admission of junk science evidence
D: holding that scientific evidence must satisfy the pertinent delaware rules of evidence concerning admission of scientific testimony or evidence ie dre 401 402 403 702 and 703 and be relevant and reliable
C.