Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
should be denied as to the Plaintiffs’ common law tort claims for negligent hiring and supervision (Count 3), negligent infliction of emotional distress (Count' 6), negligence (Count 7), and loss of services (Count 8). B. Negligent infliction of emotional distress. The Defendants argue that Mrs. Reiber’s claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress fails for another reason also. They argue that “‘[t]o maintain a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress, a plaintiff must show that she suffered a .direct physical impact.’ Neal, [ 2005 WL 1939955 at *10] (citing Bader v. Johnson, 732 N.E.2d 1212, 1221 (Ind. 2005) (stating that ‘[a]s modified, the [impact] rule still requires physical impact’); Powdertech, Inc. v. Joganic, 776 N.E.2d 1251, 1263-64 (Ind.Ct.App. 2002) ; Ketchmark v. N. Ind. Pub. Serv. Co., 818
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing torts of intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress
B. holding that act did not bar intentional infliction of emotional distress claim
C. holding that under south dakota law compensation for negligent infliction of emotional distress requires manifestation of physical symptoms and intentional infliction of emotional distress requires an extreme disabling emotional response
D. holding that employee could not state a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress under fela without a showing of physical impact
E. holding that in being discharged employee did not sustain the direct physical impact required to maintain an action for negligent infliction of emotional distress
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.