Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
GDHI took simultaneous title to both the Boat and its storage location— i.e., the Real Property. The parties therefore simply implied that delivery could occur at the same time as the execution of the Dation. Any additional physical delivery of the Boat was not necessary, and the Court concludes that Sharp conveyed the Boat to GDHI when it executed the Dation (on January 5, 2012). As a result, GDHI had no notice of the voidability of the transfer until after the conveyance of the Boat. Moreover, in the Final Order, the Texas Court never restrained Sharp from alienating the Boat; in fact, the TRO, the Temporary Injunction, and the Final Order never mention the Boat. Cf. Reliant Hosp. Partners, LLC v. Cornerstone Healthcare Group Holdings, Inc., 374 S.W.3d 488, 502 (Tex.App.2012) . Rather, these orders specifically describe
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding carson inapplicable where an order had the practical effect of granting an injunction
B. holding in part that the trial court abused its discretion in granting a temporary injunction in the absence of a showing that the plaintiff did not have an adequate remedy at law
C. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by granting such a temporary injunction
D. holding that general release must name  or specifically describe parties to be discharged
E. holding that under texr civ p 683 ejvery order granting an injunction must be specific in its terms and describe in reasonable detail the act or acts to be restrained
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.