With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Mining and Mfg., 87 F.R.D. at 323 (stating rules governing service should be liberally construed to uphold substituted service when prompt actual notice occurs); Larson v. Hendrickson, 394 N.W.2d 524, 526 (Minn.App.1986) (stating actual notice contributed to finding service was effective). Here, the deputy sheriff of Sher-burne County attempted service at Peterson’s home on June 24, 1998. When told that Peterson was not home, the deputy sheriff delivered the summons and complaint to Peterson’s 14-year-old stepson who was at Peterson’s home on a six-day, non-custodial visitation. For the past four to five years, Peters p. 844, 845 (S.D.N.Y.1977) (stating adult daughter home from college overnight was residing at her parents’ home); Zuckerman v. McCulley, 7 F.R.D. 739, 743 (E.D.Mo.1947) (<HOLDING>), appeal dismissed, 170 F.2d 1015 (1948);

A: holding housekeeper did not reside therein
B: holding babysitter was not residing therein
C: holding that a tenday visitor was not residing therein
D: holding janitor working in house during day did not reside therein
D.