Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Here, a site plan depicting the easement over Lot 17 is recorded. This version of the plan was recorded 18 days after the property was conveyed to the Horgans, but had been submitted to and approved by the planning board prior to the sale. The plaintiffs argue that the fact that this plan was not recorded until after the conveyance is significant. We disagree. The plan was approved prior to the sale and recorded a short time later. The CCR acknowledges that subsequent site plans may be recorded, but that such plans become part of the master site plan. Further, the Horgan deed recognizes that the property is subject to the CCR. The plan depicting the easement, therefore, is valid, notwithstanding that it was recorded after the property was conveyed. See also Close, 146 N.H. at 484 . The question is whether another document
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that purchaser did not take property subject to unrecorded easement created by private agreement
B. recognizing that an easement may entitle the easement owner to do acts which were not for the easement would constitute a nuisance
C. holding that an easement agreement and an unrecorded easement plan created an easement
D. holding that one who possesses deeded easement need not use the easement to maintain his title and easement cannot be extinguished from nonuser alone
E. recognizing ways in which an easement may be created
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.