Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the M.T. Cole “A” lease, we hold there is no evidence of the factors enumerated in section 2.03(a) of the Act of an intent of the parties to create a partnership for any business purpose other than the purpose that is unenforceable under the statute of frauds. There is no evidence that Phelps and Helms had a right to receive a share of profits from any business other than the development of the M.T. Cole “A” lease and there is no evidence of a written agreement to share any specific percentage of profits with respect to any specific ownership interest in the lease. There is no evidence of an intent to be partners in anything other the development of the field, which would require the establishment of a joint venture and a joint operating agreement, both 4 S.W.2d 334, 335 (1939) . Accordingly, we sustain issues four and six.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that there was no evidence or inferences to be drawn from the evidence to support the damage award
B. holding that halper does not apply when a monetary damage award has not been imposed
C. holding that property damage occurred when homeowners noticed damage not when house was improperly constructed
D. holding damage award immaterial when no liability
E. holding that to offset a jurys damage award a separate thirdparty insurance award must cover the same loss which served as the basis for the jury award
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.