Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
answered in the negative. While the instant case does not involve a service contract, the Court would follow the same analysis here in order to determine whether an independent tort exists, and thus whether the economic loss rule applies. 2 . In Walta, the New Mexico Court of Appeals did not address the issue of whether the economic loss rule applied when a fiduciary duty existed, because the parties did not preserve the issue for appeal. 131 N.M. at 546, 40 P.3d 449. 3 . Based on the Court’s conclusion on this issue, no further analysis is necessary with regard to whether the contracts between the parties constitute commercial transactions, or whether there was great disparity in bargaining power. See Farmers Alliance Mut. Ins. Co. v. Naylor, 452 F.Supp.2d 1167, 1171-72 (D.N.M.2006)
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that in commercial transactions when there is no great disparity in bargaining power of the parties economic losses are not recoverable in tort actions
B. recognizing that plaintiffs are prohibited from recovering in tort economic losses to which their entitlement flows only from a contract
C. holding that without some conduct resulting in personal injury or property damage there can be no independent tort flowing from a contractual breach which would justify a tort claim solely for economic losses
D. holding that punitive damages are not recoverable against municipalities in actions brought pursuant to 42 usc  1983
E. holding that no products liability claim lies in admiralty when commercial party alleges injury only to product itself resulting in purely economic loss insofar as the tort concern with safety is reduced when an injury is only to the product itself
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.