Which of the following was the result in Penny Garrison et al. v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, the case in the text in which the plaintiffs sought to sue a residential care facility and avoid the effect of a durable power of attorney by which the decedent's daughter signed agreements to arbitrate disputes involving the facility? A. That the durable power of attorney was ineffective because it did not grant the holder authority to enter into arbitration agreements and that the arbitration agreements, therefore, were unenforceable B. That the durable power of attorney was ineffective because it did not specifically give the daughter authority to enter into agreements involving health care and that the arbitration agreements, therefore, were unenforceable C. That the durable power of attorney was ineffective because it was revoked after the decedent became ill and that the arbitration agreements, therefore, were unenforceable D. That the durable power of attorney was effective but that the arbitration agreements were void as against public policyE. That the durable power of attorney was effective but that the arbitration agreements were void as against public policy