Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
big difference in this case, but the City Council members never testified to any such legitimate, good-faith belief, and we can find no evidence to that effect in the record.. Therefore, it seems that the City Council terminated Singleton simply because of the conversation between his wife and daughter. In this country, guilt is individual. We do not, as a general rule, punish A for the sins of B. Nor does the law today generally impute the actions of one spouse to another, or the actions of an adult child to the parent. See Forbes v. Arkansas Educational Television Comm’n, 93 F.3d 497, 501-02 (8th Cir.1996) (“We do not think any general inference can be drawn from the opinion of one spouse to that of the other.”), rev’d on other grounds, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1633, 140 L.Ed.2d 875 986) . And courts have held that a parent is not
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the deceased defendant trustees wife was a representative of her husbands estate and a proper party for substitution purposes where the wife was the primary distributee of her deceased husbands estate
B. holding that the former wife did not waive her attorneyclient privilege simply because the credibility of her claim that she relied on her husbands representations could be impeached by deposing her former attorney
C. holding that a wifes minimal involvement in her husbands business coupled with the lack of evidence that she knew of or intended to further her husbands fraudulent schemes was insufficient evidence of conspiracy
D. holding that a wife is not liable simply by virtue of the marital relationship for her husbands fraudulent acts
E. holding that a wifeis not liable simply by virtue of the marital relationship for her husbands negligent acts
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.