Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
mobile home because the comprehensive terms provided in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-72(b) had not been met might be germane to our analysis if tort law or liability insurance coverage were implicated. But see N. C. National Bank v. Robinson, 78 N.C. App. 1, 336 S.E.2d 666 (1985) (declining to apply the MVA even where the cause of action was the tort of wrongful conversion because the dispute primarily involved, “not an automobile accident case,” but, rather, security interest and entrustment issues arising out of “a business transaction in which the policies underlying the private UCC law [were] fully implicated”). The fact that the Hayes Court expressly limited its holding to these circumstances has been emphasized by our courts on several occasions. See, e.g., id. at 9, 336 S.E.2d at 671 ; Roseboro Ford, Inc. v. Bass, 77 N.C. App.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding in a case involving denial of coverage under an insurance contract that the location of documentary evidence related to insurance coverage mattered less than the location of the underlying tort suits
B. holding that the plaintiffs asserted legal basis for coverage is irrelevant to the determination of whether the insurance policy provides coverage and instead looking to the facts underlying the claim for coverage
C. recognizing that  the virginia supreme court has consistently applied the one year statute of limitation  to defamation actions 
D. recognizing that the supreme court has consistently applied an analysis keyed to economic realities 
E. recognizing that the supreme court in hayes consistently limited its holding that the mva title provisions applied instead of the ucc to cases involving tort law and liability insurance coverage 
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.