Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the trust, if any, are not set forth, and the trust is not identified by title or date, shall grant and is hereby declared to have granted a fee simple estate with full power and authority in and to the grantee in such deed to sell, convey, and grant both the legal and beneficial interest in the real estate conveyed, unless a contrary intention sh o, 417 So.2d 1035 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), Hoffenberg never had the legal ability to grant an easement over his own property. In Hensel, the appellant acquired title to lots A, B, C and D. Appellant later sold lots B, C and D to appellee. Thereafter, the parties entered into a written contract which provided that lot B was to be repurchased by appellant. As originally drawn, that contract provided for an easement t pt. 87 (Cal.App. 4 Dist.1991) ; Hayes v. Moreau, 104 N.H. 124, 180 A.2d 438
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding one cannot grant an easement to oneself one can only reserve such interest in land granted to another
B. holding that the owner of an equitable interest in property in the form of a land contract can grant a mortgage on that interest under ohio law
C. holding no easement can be created over a section of land in favor of another adjoining parcel when one owner owns both properties
D. holding that one who possesses deeded easement need not use the easement to maintain his title and easement cannot be extinguished from nonuser alone
E. recognizing that one cannot have an easement in his own land
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.