With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". incidents, all of which predated her injury. However, these arguments are irrelevant to her workers’ compensation claim. If she wanted to pursue these arguments, she should have appealed her termination, as she had every right to do for a fee of $100. Because Mitchell knowingly failed to avail herself of that right, the agency’s stated reason for terminating her—which is entirely understandable and reasonable on its face—should not be subject to question. See Wright v. White, 693 So.2d 898, 902 (Miss.1997) (“[F]or state law purposes the statutory method of administrative appeal and judicial review provided by the state civil service statute is the exclusive remedy for grievances related to state employment...."); see also Miss. Dep’t of Corr. v. McClee, 677 So.2d 732, 736 (Miss.1996) (<HOLDING>); Miss. Dep’t of Corr. v. Smith, 883 So.2d 124,

A: holding that even if a state employees termination is properly appealed the employee bears the burden of persuasion that the alleged conduct did not occur
B: holding that employer bears the full burden of persuasion for the facts requisite to an exemption
C: holding that plaintiff bears burden of production as well as persuasion
D: recognizing that the burden of persuasion for a showing of prejudice was on the defendant
A.