With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (Pls.’ Resp. [DN 65]' 11.) In support of their contention, Plaintiffs state “[e]ven Dr. Huxol admitted’ he gave suggestions to Dr. West as to treatment options.” (Id. at 11-12.), Dr. Huxol asserts that Plaintiffs, in'stating that Dr. Huxol “gave suggestions .-to Dr, West as to treatment options,” “failed to provide any insight into when or how Dr. Huxol agreed to treat or otherwise undertake treatment of Ms. West.” (Def. Huxol’s Reply Supp. Summ. J. [DN 67] 2-3.) Dr. Huxol further asserts that Plaintiffs do not “cite any evidence to establish a physician-patient relationship was established.” (Id. at 3.) The Court agrees with Dr. Huxol and finds that no physician-patient relationship was established between Dr. Huxol and Mrs. West because Dr. Huxol did not, expressly or implie 1993) (<HOLDING>). Based on the record, the Court finds that Dr.

A: holding that where doctor never had contact with patient nor reviewed patients records no relationship existed so as to trigger a duty
B: holding that obstetrician who consulted with patients treating physician by telephone was not in physicianpatient relationship and therefore owed no duty to patient obstetrician did no more than answer professional inquiry of colleague and did not contact examine or treat patient
C: holding that the physicianpatient relationship terminated when the patient missed a scheduled appointment and did not see the physician again and that the relationship did not continue despite the fact the patient later secured a refill of a prescription that was prescribed during the relationship
D: holding that no physicianpatient relationship between doctor who gave informal opinion over telephone at request of treating physician and minor patient whose case was discussed and thus doctor did not owe duty of care to patient
B.