With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". at the same time that the trial court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss, it also granted defendant additional time to respond to plaintiffs request to admit. Defendant did so and stated that the account number cited by plaintiff was not for defendant’s account; he had never used the account; and he never signed an agreement under that account number. Thus, he did contest the existence of the credit card contract at the heart of this case. Plaintiffs failure to attach a copy of the credit card contract to the complaint, recite the terms of the contract within the complaint, or attach an affidavit showing that the document is inaccessible is grounds for dismissal. Sherman, 392 Ill. App. 3d at 733; see also Plocar v. Dunkin’ Donuts of America, Inc., 103 Ill. App. 3d 740, 749 (1981) (<HOLDING>). Thus, defendant’s motion to dismiss should

A: holding that dismissal of a breach of contract claim was proper in light of the plaintiffs failure to recite or attach a copy of the contract
B: holding the government liable to plaintiffs for breach of contract
C: recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract
D: holding that where there was a breach of contract accompanied by aggravating factors that it was proper to treble the breach of contract damages
A.