With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 31, 2007), the bankruptcy court reasoned that be- cause § 523(d) was intended to curb abu-sive practices by institutional creditors, not an individual creditor in circumstances similar to the debtor, requiring the plain-tiff to assume responsibility for the debt- or’s attorney’s fees would be unjust. Id. at *2 (citing Thomas, 258 B.R. at 169); ac-cord Walter v. Walter (In re Walter), 50 B.R. 521, 523 (Bankr. D. Del. 1985) (ob-serving that “Congress ■ did not intend equally positioned private parties, absent an abusive filing, to bear the expense of the other’s cost of litigation.”) Courts also have found special circum-stances to exist when the plaintiffs com-plaint included counts under provisions of the Bankruptcy Code that do not authorize fee shifting. See King, 258 B.R. at 798 (<HOLDING>); Sweriby, 529 B.R. at 710-11 (declining to

A: holding that fees should not be awarded where plaintiff also argued a claim under  523a6
B: holding that  1988 attorneys fees should not be awarded when the tax injunction act 28 usc  1341 bars the plaintiff from obtaining  1983 relief
C: holding that fees may be awarded for litigating amount of fees only where language of statute supports such conclusion
D: holding that attorney fees must be awarded where plaintiffs section 1983 claim was unreasonable and groundless
A.