Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
as a jurisdictional bar. Although it “protects from judgment,” immunity from liability “is not jurisdictional.” Harris County Hosp. Disk, 283 S.W.3d at 842. Assuming without deciding that Jesus properly asserted this affirmative defense at trial, asserting an affirmative defense does not convert it into a jurisdictional issue. Even assuming it was error for the trial court to determine that section 216.106 did not apply to Jesus and to enter a judgment against him, these were not jurisdictional errors. Because Jesus did not raise his affirmative defense of immunity from liability on appeal and because the issue is not jurisdictional, we cannot reach the merits of this argument and it cannot be a basis for reversing the trial court’s judgment. See Pat Baker Co., 971 S.W.2d at 450 . C. Analysis Stephen’s claim of slander per se
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding appellate courts cannot reverse judgment  on grounds not raised on appeal
B. holding an appellate court cannot reverse a trial courts judgment absent properly assigned error
C. holding that the court of appeals may not reverse a trial courts judgment in the absence of properly assigned error
D. recognizing that appellate court may reverse trial courts judgment when it is based on an erroneous conclusion of law
E. holding that an appellate court may not review errors that have not been assigned by a party or a point of error
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.