Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
in that year for EARN centers had worked out financially. PWDC’s President’s statement that many of the EARN centers “earned above the contract amount in certain performance benchmarks” and that those payments “ ‘busted’ the budget” could have given the jury a basis for accepting KRA’s interpretation of the contract. (App. at 2586.) If performance payments had “busted” the budget, then the jury could have concluded that PWDC had not eabined profit to 10% and had instead allowed contractors to keep all of their profits. But even if the District Court should have allowed the e-mail into evidence, the error was harmless. It is highly likely that the admission of the e-mail would not have altered the jury verdict. See McQueeney v. Wilmington Trust Co., 779 F.2d 916, 917 (3d Cir. 1985) . While the e-mail could have supported KRA’s
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that bia error is harmless when it is highly probable that error did not affect cases outcome
B. holding that noneonstitutional errors in civil suits are harmless only if it is highly probable that the errors did not affect the outcome of the case
C. holding that it is an abuse of discretion to make errors of law or clear errors of factual determination
D. holding that instructional errors that are trial errors are subject to harmless error analysis
E. holding that an error is harmless where it is highly probably that the error did not affect the outcome of the case
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.