Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of whether to impose negligence per se should not be made merely by counting how many factors lean each way. Id. at 305-06. Rather, the factors should act as guidelines to assist courts in determining the ultimate question of whether imposing tort liability for violations of a statute is fair, workable, and wise. Id. Because the parties briefed this case prior to the supreme court’s decision in Perry, their arguments did not address all of the factors listed by the court. However, McCurdy’s primary argument on appeal is that the standard of conduct defined in section 61(a) is conditional in nature, and, therefore, the statute does not provide an absolute duty sufficient to support the application of negligence per se. This argument closely parallels one v.App. — Austin 1971, no writ) . These courts have reasoned that, if a
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that whether a driver yielded the right of way as per section 74 depends upon whether he acted negligently or unreasonably
B. holding that whether a driver safely entered an intersection as per section 71c depends upon whether he acted prudently
C. holding that whether a driver operated his vehicle on an improved shoulder in safety as per section 54a depends upon whether he acted reasonably under the common law
D. recognizing that whether a consumer survey should be admitted depends among other things on whether the questions are leading or suggestive 
E. holding whether these explanations are reasonable or not depends upon matters that the jury must decide including witness eredibility
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.