Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
S. E. 2d 613, 615 (1966) (“[The plaintiff] must allege all the elements of a cause of action for the tort the same as would be required if there were no allegation of a conspiracy”); Lesperance v. North American Aviation, Inc., 217 Cal. App. 2d 336, 345, 31 Cal. Rptr. 873, 878 (1963) (“[Conspiracy cannot be made the subject of a civil action unless something is done which without the conspiracy would give a right of action” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Middlesex Concrete Products & Excavating Corp. v. Carteret Indus. Assn., 37 N. J. 507, 516, 181 A. 2d 774, 779 (1962) (“[A] conspiracy cannot be made the subject of a civil action unless something has been done which, absent the conspiracy, would give a right of action”); Chapman v. Pollock, 148 F. Supp. 769, 772 (WD Mo. 1957) ; Olmsted, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 218
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that both the unlawful possession and unlawful use prongs were met and noting that the firearm transferred to the individual was not registered making the individuals possession of it necessarily unlawful
B. holding that a plaintiff who charged the defendants with conspiring to perpetrate an unlawful purpose could not recover because the defendants committed no unlawful act
C. holding that unlawful restraint could not even be an included offense
D. holding that because original interception was not unlawful subsequent use by prosecutor could not be found unlawful
E. holding that conspiracy requires an agreement to accomplish either an unlawful purpose or a lawful purpose by unlawful means
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.