Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
'we need not accept extrinsic facts not pleaded nor need we accept legal conclusions in contradiction of the pleaded facts'" See Osguthorpe v. Wolf Mountain Resorts, LC, 2010 UT 29, §10, 232 P.3d 999 (quoting Allred v. Cook, 590 P.2d 318, 319 (Utah 1979)). 4 . The alleged malicious intent on the part of NCR falls more appropriately within a claim of malicious prosecution, under which an actor may be liable for initiating or procuring "criminal proceedings against another who is not guilty of the offense charged ... if (a) [the accuser] initiates or procures the proceedings without probable cause and primarily for a purpose other than that of bringing an offender to justice, and (b) the proceedings have terminated in favor of the accused." Restatement (Second) of Torts § 653 P.3d 1042 . 7 . Because statutory amendments made
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that act did not bar intentional infliction of emotional distress claim
B. holding that a tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress is distinct from a claim for emotional distress damages under the employment discrimination statute
C. holding that emotional pain and a need for counseling combined with physical pain medical bills loss of employment and a need for sexual therapy supported a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress
D. recognizing validity of cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress
E. recognizing the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.