Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
decline to set a particular amount that constitutes a substantial reduction; this is a question for the trier of fact to determine, examining the totality of the circumstances. Because the commissioner did not consider whether Terry acted reasonably by leaving when faced with a reduction in pay and whether exhausting her alternatives by testing would have been futile, we remand for a new hearing. Terry requests attorney fees. RCW 50.32.160 provides that if this court overturns or modifies the commissioner’s ruling, the claimant is entitled to reasonable attorney fees. Accordingly, Terry is entitled to attorney fees upon timely filing an affidavit of attorney fees with this court. Agid and Ellington, JJ., concur. 1 Tapper v. Employment Sec. Dep’t, 122 Wn.2d 397, 406, 858 P.2d 494 (1993) . 2 Sweitzer v. Department of Empl. Sec., 43
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding the findings of fact required to support an alimony award are sufficient if findings of fact have been made on the ultimate facts at issue in the case and the findings of fact show the trial court properly applied the law in the case
B. holding because defendant does not argue in his brief that these findings of fact are not supported by    evidence in the record this court is bound by the trial courts findings of fact
C. holding that the court may not overturn the administrative law judges factual findings as long as they are supported by competent substantial evidence
D. holding that it is the commissioners findings of fact to the extent they modify or replace the administrative law judges findings that are relevant on appeal
E. holding that trial court made sufficient findings of fact when it dismissed appeal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.