Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Social Servs., 207 N.W.2d 117, 121 (Iowa 1973) (“Stare decisis is a valuable legal doctrine which lends stability to the law....”). On the other hand, stare decisis does not prevent the court from reconsidering, repairing, correcting or abandoning past judicial announcements when error is manifest, including error in the interpretation of statutory enactments. See Lehigh Clay Prods., Ltd. v. Iowa Dep’t of Transp., 545 N.W.2d 526, 528 (Iowa 1996); Young v. City of Des Moines, 262 N.W.2d 612, 615 (Iowa 1978), overruled on other grounds by Parks v. City of Marshalltown, 440 N.W.2d 377, 379 (Iowa 1989). Thus, stare decisis “should not be invoked to maintain a clearly erroneous result.” Kersten Co., 207 N.W.2d at 121; accord State v. Johnson, 257 Iowa 1052, 1056, 135 N.W.2d 518, 521 (1965) . It is especially critical that stare decisis
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that trial court has no duty to establish waiver on record
B. holding that the court of appeals lacks the authority to overrule decisions of the supreme court of north carolina and has a responsibility to follow those decisions until otherwise ordered by the supreme court
C. holding the court has a duty to correct erroneous past decisions
D. holding that the supreme court has final appellate review of agency decisions
E. holding that the presence of the correct address in the sworn affidavit could correct a typographical error in the warrant
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.