With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". N.W.2d 583 (1959), overruled on other grounds Dailey v. A.C. Nelsen Co., 178 Neb. 881, 136 N.W.2d 186 (1965) (stating: “The burden of evidence at any particular time rests on the party who would be defeated if no further evidence would be introduced.”). The defendants have not shown that the trust was amended prior to the initiation of this suit. Because the defendants have failed to rebut FNB’s prima facie case, we treat the trust as invalid at the time this suit was filed. At that time the trust held only bare legal title to the property. As a result, regardless of the curative effect of the subsequent amendment, the trust and Daggett’s sons took Daggett’s equitable interest in the real estate subject to FNB’s judgment. See Nowka v. Nowka, 157 Neb. 57, 66, 58 N.W.2d 600, 605, (1953) (<HOLDING>). FNB may reach Daggett’s interest in the real

A: holding the beginning of a creditors action to subject an equitable estate to the payment of a judgment gives a specific lien upon the property which it is sought to reach and this lien continues while the cause is pending
B: holding that the lien bond releases the property from the lien but the lien is then secured by the bond
C: holding that where property subject to the irss timely filed lien is sold during a nonjudicial sale and the irs is not given notice of the sale the sale of the property is made subject to and without disturbing the lien
D: holding that the attorneys charging lien may be asserted and enforced in the civil action which gave rise to the lien claim or in an independent action
A.