Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
for the Hostile Work Environment Because the district court concluded that Bell Atlantic was entitled to summary judgment on the first element of a hostile work environment claim, it did not reach the second element: whether any harassing conduct can fairly be imputed to the employer for purposes of assessing liability. See Mack v. Otis Elevator Co., 326 F.3d at 122. Bell Atlantic submits that, on the record before this court, this question of vicarious liability can be resolved in its favor as a matter of law, thereby providing an alternative ground for affirming the district court’s award of summary judgment. In the exercise of our discretion and in the interests of judicial economy, we address this issue, see Booking v. General Star Mgmt. Co., 254 F.3d 414, 418-19 (2d Cir.2001) , and conclude that disputed issues of fact
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that subject to limited exceptions this court will not consider issues not presented to the district court but raised for the first time on appeal
B. holding that where it was clear that the court of appeals had limited the issues on resentencing to the one issue raised in the defendants first appeal the district court did not err in declining to consider other issues raised by the defendant on remand
C. holding issues not raised in appellate brief are waived
D. recognizing appellate courts discretion to consider issues raised in the district court but not resolved there
E. recognizing that an appellate court ordinarily will not consider issues that were not raised at trial
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.