Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Code (UCC) as adopted by Virginia: “Instrument” means a negotiable instrument as defined in § 8.3A-104, Title 8.8A or any other writing which evidences a right to the payment of money and is not itself a security agreement or lease and is of a type which is in ordinary course of business transferred by delivery with any necessary indorsement or assignment.... Va.Code § 8.9 — 105(l)(i). It is undisputed that the CD is neither a “negotiable instrument” nor a security agreement nor a lease. See id. The only question is whether the CD is a writing evidencing a right to the payment of money “which is in ordinary course of business transferred by delivery with any necessary indorsement or assignment.” M The bankruptcy court concluded that (1) although t 490 S.E.2d 334, 338-39 (W.Va.1997) . Almost every court to face the issue has
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing the majority rule
B. holding that certificates of deposit are instruments not general intangibles even if the certificate is labeled nontransferable
C. holding that certificates of deposit are instruments and noting that the majority of jurisdictions agree
D. recognizing that majority of jurisdictions hold that the burden of proving an easement is on the party claiming such right and must be established by clear and convincing proof
E. holding that nonnegotiable certificates of deposit are instruments within the meaning of ucc article 9 even if transferability is severely restricted
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.