In Whalen V

In Whalen v. Union Bag & Paper Co., where a paper mill polluted a farmer's creek so he sued to stop the pollution, the appeals court noted that:

A) if courts refused to grant injunctions when the damage to the plaintiff is slight compared with the defendant's expense of abating the condition, it would favor the poor litigant over rich defendants
B) if courts refused to grant injunctions when the damage to the plaintiff is slight compared with the defendant's expense of abating the condition, it would deprive the poor litigant of his little property by giving it to those already rich
C) if courts refused to grant injunctions when the damage to the plaintiff is slight compared with the defendant's expense of abating the condition, it would increase pollution
D) if courts refused to grant injunctions when the damage to the plaintiff is slight compared with the defendant's expense of abating the condition, there would be no more pollution suits
E) if courts refused to grant injunctions when the damage to the plaintiff is slight compared with the defendant's expense of abating the condition, it would unfairly favor low income plaintiffs