With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". First Amendment rights — punishment, in the form of termination of a contract beneficial to him, because of his speech. While Defendants assert that the contract provided no benefit to the county, from which one could infer that its termination could inflict no injury on the county, Mr. Umbehr has alleged a benefit to him from the contract. The contract obviated the need for him to individually negotiate a trash hauling contract with each city; it gave him the exclusive right to haul trash for cities that ratified the agreement; and it gave him, for at least sixty days, the right to haul trash for cities pursuant to the agreement, inasmuch as the county could only terminate the contract on sixty days’ notice. Cf. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Henderson, 940 F.2d 465, 476 (9th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Further, he claims monetary injury from the

A: holding that termination is an adverse employment action
B: holding that private contract providing for immediate termination for cause or at will termination on ninety days notice gave rise to a legitimate claim of entitlement to ninety days of continued employment
C: holding that although a reason was provided in the termination letter the without cause termination provision was applicable
D: holding requirement in contract to provide notice for termination but not limiting reasons for termination constitutes atwill employment relationship
B.