Blow-Up. Jeanie is hauling several containers of gasoline in her vehicle in preparation for riding her personal watercraft. On the way home, Jeanie stops at the automatic teller machine at her bank and exits her car. Holly pulls behind her and negligently rear-ends Jeanie's car. The car explodes and results in the bank building burning to the ground. The bank sues Holly for negligence claiming that Holly should have to pay for the entire bank building. The bank claimed that it should be able to recover under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine. Which of the following is true regarding whether Holly is the proximate cause of the bank burning? A. Holly is not the proximate cause of the bank burning because it was not foreseeable that Jeanie would have gasoline in the back of her car that would result in the fire.
B. Holly's actions were not the proximate cause of the accident because actual causation cannot be established
C. Holly is not the proximate cause of the accident because her actions were not the cause in fact of the accident
D. Holly's actions were the proximate cause of the bank's buming because cause in fact can be established