Teacher:In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. The four incorrect answers are other holding statements. You should find the correct option. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? Solve this instance: the service of process here under consideration if it were held retroactive, and the Court considers that question separately, infra. First we address our attention to the effect to be given our construction of 24-113.1(b) by reason of the intervening amendment. It is obvious that the legislature had in its contemplation situations just like the one posed by the cases for decision today when it enacted 24-113.1 (c). The question raised by the amendment is this: Did the Georgia legislature feel that 24-113.1 (b) did not cover out-of-state negligence causing an in-state injury, and because of that feeling enact 24-113.1 (c) to fill the "gap", or was it simply confirming in more explicit terms the correctness of this Court's rea 7 Ga. 294, 13 S.E. 493, 14 L.R.A. 721 (1891) (<HOLDING>). We accepted the test in Pritchard as stating
Holding statements: (A) holding that the act is retroactive (B) recognizing that the application of a retroactive amendment is discretionary (C) holding that retroactive application of amended guidelines provision is not plain error (D) holding that the act is not retroactive (E) holding retroactive application
Student:
(E)