system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Hansch, 40 Wn. App. 233, 237, 698 P.2d 570 (1985) (noting Gazija, but refusing to extend the statute of limitations where appellants were aware of the facts underlying damages). ¶13 Mr. Roach points to numerous Washington cases in which clients brought legal malpractice claims prior to suffering an adverse judgment. Seamans v. Walgren, 82 Wn.2d 771, 514 P.2d 166 (1973); see Lavigne, 112 Wn. App. 677; Matson, 101 Wn. App. 472; Sherry v. Diercks, 29 Wn. App. 433, 628 P.2d 1336 (1981). Typically, damages claims are tried as a “case within a case,” being a question for the trier of fact. See Sherry, 29 Wn. App. at 437-38. ¶14 Other jurisdictions have declined to extend the discovery rule as proposed by the Huffs. See Brown v. Behles & Davis, 2004 NMCA 28, 135 N.M. 180, 86 P.3d 605, 608 (<HOLDING>); Fritzeen v. Gravel, 175 Vt. 537, 830 A.2d 49, Options: A. holding that under the ada discovery of the original act of discrimination not future confirmation of the injury or determination that the injury is unlawful is when the statute of limitations begins to run B. holding that an employees inadvertence ordinary negli genee poor judgment or inattention does not constitute misconducttherefore we conclude further findings are required regarding claimants mens rea at the time of the incidents that gave rise to her discharge from employmentvil violation of company rulewe reject employers argument that disqualification is appropriate under section 8781085evii crs2009 that seetion permits disqualification as relevant here if there is evidence that claimant engaged in theviolation of a statute or of a company rule which resulted or could have resulted in serious damage to the employers property or interests or could have endangered the life of the worker or other persons such as mistreatment of patients in a hospital or nursing home serving liquor to minors selling prescription items without prescriptions from licensed doctors immoral conduct which has an effect on workers job status divulging of confidential information which resulted or could have resulted in damage to the employers interests failure to observe conspicuously posted safety rules intentional falsification of expense accounts inventories or other reeords or reports whether or not substantial harm or injury was incurred or removal or attempted removal of employers property from the premises of the employer without proper authorityhere there is no evidence in the record that claimants actions resulted or could have resulted in serious damage to the employers property or interests or could have endangered the life of the worker or other personsthe panels order is set aside and the case is remanded to the panel with instructions to remand the case to the hearing officer on remand the hearing officer shall determine based on the evidence in the record whether claimant had a good faith but mistaken belief the toilet paper remnants she took had been discarded or abandoned by employer if so the hearing officer shall award her benefits if the hearing officer determines that claimant not only acted volitionally but also had the requisite knowledge and intent to deprive her employer of its property at the time of the actions alleged in this case she is not entitled to benefitsjudge hawthorne and judge terry concursitting by assignment of the chief justice under provisions of colo const art vi 53 C. holding that allegation of procedural injury does not affect the issues of injury in fact or causation D. holding that under delaware law the policys definition of personal injury as wrongful entry or eviction or other invasion of the right of private occupancy applies only to damages incurred as a result of an invasion of an interest in real property E. holding our case law fixes the time of actual injury when an attorneys acts or omissions result in the loss of a right remedy or interest or in the imposition of a liability regardless of whether future events may affect the permanency of the injury or the amount of monetary damages eventually incurred quoting sharts v natelson 118 nm 721 885 p2d 642 646 1994

assistant: The best answer is E. holding our case law fixes the time of actual injury when an attorneys acts or omissions result in the loss of a right remedy or interest or in the imposition of a liability regardless of whether future events may affect the permanency of the injury or the amount of monetary damages eventually incurred quoting sharts v natelson 118 nm 721 885 p2d 642 646 1994