Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
probate court approved the Master’s conclusion that Adkins “attacks the ‘trust’ as a sham, but does not present a showing that the [relinquishment] agreement was entered into mistakenly, fraudulently, or by coercion. The terms of the ‘trust’ are of no concern to Mr. Adkins if he has relinquished any interest in it.” Although Adkins opposed the Master’s recommendations, there was no subsequent action by the probate court. Adkins does not appeal this order. With regard to the fraud-related defenses, Adkins filed a “Petition to Rescind and Void the ‘Relinquishment Agreement’ for the Causes of Fraud and Constructive Fraud,” but later withdrew the motion. Where a party has withdrawn pleadings, he cannot later appeal based on such grounds. See Ogden v. State, 395 P.2d 371, 372 (Alaska 1964) . Adkins’ fraud-related claims relating to the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that it was error for the trial judge to answer a jurys question without giving defendants counsel an opportunity to be heard before the trial judge responded
B. holding appeal improper where trial judge did not rule upon question
C. holding that trial judge did not err in refusing to transfer to another judge defendants motion for substitution of judge for cause where defendants motion was not made in good faith
D. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants motion for mistrial where the trial court sustained defendants objections to a question by the prosecutor containing improper information and instructed the jury to disregard the question
E. holding that trial judge did not err in refusing to transfer to another judge defendants motion for substitution of judge for cause where defendants motion lacked specificity
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.