Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
P. J. Husband appeals from a judgment modifying a 1997 dissolution judgment that awarded spousal support to wife by extending its duration for an indefinite period of time. ORS 107.135 (2001). We conclude that the trial court lacked authority to order indefinite support under the circumstances of this case and reverse. The 1997 judgment provided that husband’s spousal support obligation would end on November 30, 2002. The parties agree that husband paid the final support installment required by the 1997 judgment on October 15, 2002, and that, 9), rev den, 288 Or 335 (1980) . Wife argues, notwithstanding the provisions
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a trial court has broad discretion to modify a spousal maintenance award
B. holding that the trial court was without authority to modify a spousal support obligation when the modification proceeding was initiated ten years after the obligation to pay spousal support under the dissolution judgment had been terminated by order
C. holding that there is no spousal exception to the statute
D. holding that the trial court lacked authority to renew spousal support payments pursuant to a motion that was filed after the expiration of time during which spousal support was required to be paid under the original judgment
E. holding that the testimony of an obligor as to amount of payments was sufficient evidence to support findings of actual support paid
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.