Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
action.”); ORS 652.200 (providing for attorney fees for prosecution of an action for the collection of wages). As we understand plaintiff’s contention, it is that, because attorney fees were available and awarded in the underlying wage claim, under ORCP 68 A(l) fees are also available in the UFTA action, as an action to enforce the judgment on the wage claim and, therefore, as “services related to the prosecution or defense of’ the underlying wage claim. Plaintiff is correct that we have previously said that fees incurred in the collection of a judgment on a claim for which attorney fees are available are encompassed within “attorney fees,” as defined in ORCP 68 A(l) as fees “related to the prosecution or defense of an action.” See Holder v. Elg, 151 Or App 329, 332, 948 P2d 763 (1997) ; Johnson v. Jeppe, 77 Or App 685, 688, 713 P2d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that the party seeking attorney fees bears the burden of proving entitlement to those fees
B. holding attorney lacked standing to challenge amount of attorney fees awarded plaintiffs not parties to the appeal
C. recognizing a partys right to receive postjudgment fees for collection when the original judgment awarded that party attorney fees
D. holding that the insured was entitled to prejudgment and postjudgment interest and attorney fees as found by the jury
E. holding a summary judgment to be final although motion to assess attorney fees remained pending because award of attorney fees is collateral to judgment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.