With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". only a potential claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Defendant has argued in its motion for summary judgment that plaintiff has failed to show that she suffered a physical injury. See Randolph v. Lambert, 926 So.2d 941 (Miss.Ct.App.2006) (claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress requires that plaintiff prove “some sort of physical manifestation of injury or demonstrable harm, whether it be physical or mental, and that harm must have been reasonably forseeable to the defendant”) (quoting American Bankers’ Ins. Co. of Florida v. Wells, 819 So.2d 1196, 1208 (Miss.2001)). In response, plaintiff argues that as a result of defendant’s actions, she became depressed and was prescribed depression medication. This is insufficient to sustain her claim. See id. (<HOLDING>). Conclusion Based on the foregoing, it is

A: holding that evidence that plaintiff did not regularly perform her prescribed exercises was insufficient to support a mitigation of damages claim in the absence of physician testimony that she failed to mitigate her damages
B: holding in a case arising under the fcra that the remainder of plaintiffs complaints such as feeling frustrated and degraded are insufficient standing alone to support damages for mental anguish
C: holding that plaintiffs proof that she became depressed and was prescribed depression medication by her family physician was insufficient to support claim and stating evidence that randolph is very depressed and very upset is insufficient to sustain damages for mental anguish
D: holding the claimant established by clear and convincing evidence that her depression was caused by her compensable physical injury
C.