With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". embodies both punitive and compensatory damages. See Superturf, Inc. v. Monsanto Co., 660 F.2d 1275, 1283 (8th Cir.1981); Clark Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 148 F.2d 580, 582 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 326 U.S. 734, 66 S.Ct. 42, 90 L.Ed. 437 (1945). This Court has previously held that three separate awards for punitive damages based on the same conduct were inappropriate. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Cliser, 267 Md. 406, 424-425, 298 A.2d 16 (1972). Thus, the plaintiffs, if they succeed in proving their case against The Store, Ltd., and its officers, will have to choose between receiving treble damages for the antitrust violation or compensatory and punitive damages for the tort arising from some of the same acts. See Superturf Inc. v. Monsanto Co., supra, 660 F.2d at 1283-1284 (<HOLDING>). JUDGMENT AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN

A: recognizing that an award of treble damages for an antitrust violation and punitive damages for common law tortious interference with business relations based on same conduct would be duplicative holding that punitive and treble damages cannot both be awarded and indicating that a special jury verdict in this situation would be appropriate
B: holding treble damages under the civil theft statute are punitive
C: holding that treble damages awarded under the civil theft statute are remedial not punitive
D: holding that a plaintiff is entitled to either statutory treble damages or punitive damages whichever is the greater
A.