In CASE 52EBC I,Inc

In CASE 5.2EBC I,Inc.v.Goldman,Sachs & Co.,(2005) the plaintiffs claimed that Goldman Sachs breached a fiduciary duty in acting as an underwriter and in providing advice to eToys,the plaintiff's predecessor,in regard to an initial public offering of stock.How did the court rule and why?

A) The court dismissed the case on the basis that Goldman Sachs as an underwriter could not be considered a fiduciary based on its role in the transactions at issue.
B) The court refused to order a dismissal of the plaintiff's claim and found that Goldman Sachs' failure to disclose a material conflict of interest established a claim for breach of fiduciary duty.
C) The court dismissed the case because Goldman Sachs had every right to make a profit out of the transaction so long as no actual misrepresentations were made to the plaintiffs.
D) The court refused to order a dismissal of the plaintiff's claim and found that Goldman Sachs' could be held liable based on material misrepresentations made to the plaintiffs regarding the value of the stock involved in the initial public offering.