With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". relief through that avenue. It is true that several jurisdictions recognize an exception to at-will termination via a tort for retaliatory or wrongful discharge where the discharge contravenes public policy. See, e.g. Sheets v. Teddy’s Frosted Foods, Inc., 179 Conn. 471, 427 A.2d 385, 388-89 (1980) (recognizing a claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy where plaintiff was fired for insisting his employer comply with FDA requirements); Martin Marietta Corp. v. Lorenz, 823 P.2d 100, 108 (Colo.1992) (recognizing cause of action under public policy exception to at-will termination doctrine where employee refused to report falsely to his superior the safety and quality of a machine); Palmateer v. Int’l Harvester Co., 85 Ill.2d 124, 52 Ill.Dec. 13, 421 N.E.2d 876 (1981) (<HOLDING>). However, Florida does not have such a public

A: holding that employees retaliatory discharge based on employees election to public office did not violate public policy
B: holding that an atwill employee who alleges retaliatory discharge for the filing of a workers compensation claim has stated a cause of action under pennsylvania law
C: holding employee has cause of action for retaliatory discharge in contravention of public policy where employee was fired for reporting fellow employees alleged criminal activities to local law enforcement
D: holding that federal law can provide source of state public policy for determining whether discharge of employee violated clear mandate of public policy
C.