Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
William L. Prosser, Handbook of The Law of Torts, p. 2 (4th ed.1971). Wrongful injunction falls within this concept of civil wrong. The duty to avoid the harms caused to a defendant by an inappropriate injunction is perhaps best explained as a special duty created when the government establishes a special relationship with a person by bringing suit against that person. See Everton v. Willard, 468 So.2d 936, 938 (Fla.1985); Simpson v. City of Miami, 700 So.2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Hartley v. Floyd, 512 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Although we conclude that the claim is in the nature of strict liability, we also conclude that wrongful injunction is a “wrongful act” for purposes of the waiver in section 768.28. See Schick v. Florida Dep’t of Agric., 504 So.2d 1318 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) . Once it is decided that the duty exists in
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a state may waive its sovereign immunity
B. holding that plaintiffs claim was not barred by sovereign immunity because he sought specific relief against a government official
C. holding that sovereign immunity barred claim for compensatory sanctions against the government
D. holding that sovereign immunity barred a wrongful death claim against the board and stating that the only question is whether the boards sovereign immunity protection was waived emphasis added
E. holding inverse condemnation action not barred by sovereign immunity
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.