Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Property (Mortgage ) § 5.1(a), an “assumption of liability” means “a promise by the transferee of mortgaged real estate, whether made to the transferor or to the mortgagee, to perform the obligation secured-by the mortgage.” (emphasis added); see also Burlington State Bank v. Tucker, 76 S.W.2d 811, 814 (Tex.Civ.App.-Austin 1934, writ refused) (“Her father’s obligation would not under said statute become her personal obligation; but she could, for the protection of her inheritance, validly assume it ....”). Wells Fargo cites several cases stating that every party to a contract must agree to modify that contract. See, e.g., Powell v. Thompson, 130 Tex. 577, 112 S.W.2d 173, 176 (Tex.1938); Hathaway v. General Mills, Inc., 711 S.W.2d 227, 22 1, 193 (Tex.Civ.App.-Austin 1938, writ dism’d) . Struble was not a necessary party to the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that because a mortgage provides the security for the repayment of the note the person having standing to foreclose a note secured by a mortgage may be either the holder of the note or a nonholder in possession of the note who has the rights of a holder
B. holding that note marked in rem gave maker no liability at all beyond property itself and that creditor was unable to maintain any action against maker to reach any of makers other assets
C. holding that a bank is required to notify the maker of a promissory note by some affirmative act upon exercise of its option to accelerate the maturity date of the note
D. holding failure to pay a debt due under a promissory note is a breach of contract claim under florida law
E. holding that even after a debt has been assumed a creditor can look to the maker for the collection of its note and the enforcement of its lien upon the assuming partys failure to pay
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.