Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
is well settled that representations are construed to be fraudulent when made by one who either knows the assurances to be false or else not knowing the verity asserts them to be true.... Neither actual dishonesty of purpose nor intent to deceive is an element of constructive fraud. Lane v. Rachel, 239 Ark. 400, 389 S.W.2d 621, 624 (1965) (emphasis in original); see also South County, Inc. v. First West. Loan Co., 315 Ark. 722, 871 S.W.2d 325, 327 (1994) (describing constructive fraud as the “making of misrepresentations by one who, not knowing whether they are true or not, asserts them to be true without knowledge of their falsity and without moral guilt or evil intent”); Cardiac Thoracic & Vascular Surgery, P.A. Profit Sharing Trust v. Bond, 310 Ark. 798, 840 S.W.2d 188, 191 (1992) . To establish constructive fraud under
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a cause of action for constructive fraud will lie even when the misrepresentations were made innocently and their false nature is not discovered until well after the representations are made
B. holding that rule does not apply where defendant made false representations
C. holding that defendants false representations that concealed cause of action preclude statute of limitations defense
D. recognizing that where the looting is complete before the mailing is made a claim for mail fraud will not lie
E. holding that the bespeaks caution doctrine does not apply to representations of present facts that were false when made
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.