With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to file their own notices of appeal. See Ash v. Hack Branch Distrib. Co., 54 S.W.Bd 401, 409 n. 2 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001, pet. denied) (“Because [appellee] does not seek to alter the judgment, we conclude that it may properly assert independent grounds for affir-mance of the judgment even though it did not file its own notice of appeal. This seems particularly apt in a summary judgment case in which the movant is the appellee because the Supreme Court has expressly held that an ‘appellate court may consider other grounds that the movant preserved for review and [the] trial court did not rule on in the interest of judicial economy.’ ”); see also Hensley v. Village of Tiki Island, No. 14-03-00423-CV, 2004 WL 2162637, *8 n. 10 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. denied) (mem.op.) (<HOLDING>); Carrico v. Kondos, 111 S.W.3d 582, 587 n. 4

A: holding that summary judgment must be affirmed where multiple grounds are asserted and the appellant does not attack all grounds on appeal
B: recognizing an appellee may assert additional independent grounds for affirmance of the judgment even if it does not file a notice of appeal as long as such grounds were raised in appellees motion for summary judgment
C: holding where movant asserts several grounds in support of its summary judgment motion and the trial court does not specify the grounds on which judgment was granted the reviewing court can affirm the judgment if any of the grounds are meritorious
D: holding that party may not appeal summary judgment in favor of opponent when grounds opposing summary judgment asserted on appeal were not raised before trial court
B.