With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". § 1983 suit. Middleton and McDonald then filed a joint stipulation to dismiss the case with prejudice, and the district court terminated the case pursuant to their stipulation on September 30, 1999. The state paid the funds into Middleton’s prison account on December 2,1999. Eight days after depositing the funds into Middleton’s prison account, the state invoked the provisions of the Missouri Incarceration Reimbursement Act (MIRA), Mo.Rev.Stat. §§ 217.825 — 217.841, by filing suit in state court to collect 90% of the funds then in Middleton’s prison account to reimburse the state for the cost of his incarceration on the murder convictions. Middleton responded that federal law precluded the state’s recovery of these funds, citing Hankins v. Finnel, 964 F.2d 853, 861 (8th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1013, 113 S.Ct. 635,

A: holding that foster parents are not state actors
B: holding student activity fees not to be state funds when they were segregated from university funds and the state treasury
C: holding that private hospital and physicians who involuntarily committed plaintiff under massachusetts statute were not state actors noting that state regulation even if extensive and receipt of federal funds do not establish state action
D: holding in a factspecific circumstance that the supremacy clause prohibited the state from using mira to recover funds it had paid to an inmate as compensation for a state actors civil rights violation
D.