With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Gutierrez, and prove the State’s substantial role in the operating and planning of Van Duyne’s foster care within the Youngs’ home.” {29} In regard to immunity from a claim based on the post-adoption knowledge, Plaintiff can find no solace in any New Mexico case. First of all, Plaintiff has failed to show how CYFD’s duties and actions in regard to pre-adoption foster care and placement are relevant to the post-adoption issues. There exist no facts alleged or legal authority showing any causation or even correlation between CYFD’s duties and actions at the foster care and placement stage and CYFD’s kn ng that Section 41-4-9 did not apply to claims for damages relating to placement of foster child with history of sex abuse of other children); Chee Owens, 106 N.M. at 515, 745 P.2d at 1168 (<HOLDING>). No statute or regulation Plaintiff has

A: holding that a summons directed to the commissioner of motor vehicles was defective process as against a nonresident defendant in an action arising out of operation of a motor vehicle in this state
B: holding that the sensible and popular understanding of what a motor vehicle accident entails necessarily involves the motor vehicle being operated as a motor vehicle 
C: holding design planning and enforcement of bus safety rules for school bus transportation were not operation of motor vehicle under section 4145
D: holding that a tip from a bus driver made via the bus dispatcher was entitled to a bolstered inference of reliability since he would be risking his employers displeasure by making a false report
C.