With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". It is not the duty of this Court to construct arguments for or find support for appellant’s right to appeal from an interlocutory order; instead, the appellant has the burden of showing this Court that the order deprives the appellant of a substantial right which would be jeopardized absent a review prior to a final determination on the merits. Jeffreys v. Raleigh Oaks Joint Venture, 115 N.C. App. 377, 380, 444 S.E.2d 252, 254 (1994). Plaintiff has not addressed the appealability of the interim order here and thus has failed to meet her burden of showing that the appeal has been properly taken. This Court has recognized that similar “interim” orders entered in the domestic context are not immediately appealable. See, e.g., Dixon v. Dixon, 62 N.C. App. 744, 303 S.E.2d 606 (1983) (<HOLDING>); Smart v. Smart, 59 N.C. App. 533, 297 S.E.2d

A: holding such denial to be an immediately appealable collateral final order
B: holding that the ordering of a rehearing caused the judgment to not be final and appealable
C: holding that a mandatory injunction entered pursuant to nc gen stat  5020i ordering one party to return property to the former marital home pending final resolution of the action for divorce and equitable distribution is not immediately appealable
D: holding that a third party holding legal title to property is a necessary party in an action for equitable distribution
C.