Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
893.80(4), which limits immunity to "acts done in the exercise of legislative, quasi-legislative, judicial or quasi-judicial functions." Beginning with the injury that Showers has alleged, we note that Showers' allegations are different in kind from the allegations underlying the Lyons test for governmental contractor immunity. The substance of Showers' claim is not that Musson was negligent in its implementation of a decision made in the exercise of a governmental entity's legislative, quasi-le , 253 N.W.2d 240 (1977) (same). ¶ 54. In contrast, Showers alleges that Musson's performance of its construction duties, such as maintaining drainage at the worksite, did not meet the standard of due care for construction work. Cf. Brooks v. Hayes, 133 Wis. 2d 228, 234-35, 395 N.W.2d 167 (1986) . An allegation such as Showers makes does not
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the law imposes on every person who enters upon an active course of conduct the positive duty to exercise ordinary care to protect others from harm and calls a violation of that duty negligence  that a complete binding contract between the parties is not a prerequisite to a duty to use due care in ones actions     and that architects may be held liable for a breach of the duty of care and breach of contract that results in foreseeable injury economic or otherwise
B. holding that a landowner owed no duty of care to a contractors employee in the situation posed by the parties
C. holding only a material breach discharges contractors duty to perform
D. recognizing that a construction contract implicitly imposes a duty on contractors to perform work according to the standard of due care
E. holding that a general acute care hospital may not delegate its duty to provide physicians for emergency room care because the law imposes a duty on hospital to provide that health care
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.