Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
evidence to rebut the presumption of ownership created by the certificates of title; and (3) the facts of this case do not give rise to creation of a trust. It is accordingly ORDERED that the Trustee’s objection at ECF No. 14 is SUSTAINED and the three vehicles are determined to be non-exempt property of this bankruptcy estate. ORDERED. 1 . See [ECF No. 1], at 12. 2 . See [ECF No. 17], at 5. 3 . Fla. Stat. 710.111(1)(f). 4 . See [ECF No. 27-1], at 5 (the Debtor at her 341 meeting stating, "the reason they’re in my name is because to put them in their name the insurance would have been astronomical”). 5 . In re Kirk, 381 B.R. 800, 802 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.2007) (quoting Nash Miami Motors, Inc. v. Bandet, 47 So.2d 701, 703 (Fla.1950)); see also Cannova v. Corran, 92 So.2d 614, 619 (Fla.1957)  ("The presumption is that [the individual] was
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a jury is presumed to follow the trial courts instructions
B. holding that an action brought in the name of a person adjudicated as incapacitated instead of in the name of her guardian cannot be corrected as a misnomer
C. holding arresting a person for refusing to provide his or her name violates the fourth amendment
D. holding that a jury is presumed to follow a judges instructions
E. holding that a person is presumed to own all property that is titled in her name
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.