With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". benefit. Hartbarger argues that nothing he did is encompassed by any of the categories in that list. We see no reason why the list should be deemed inclusive of all reasons for which an employee might be disciplined or terminated, or indeed, why the list should preclude discharge for no reason at all. There is no statement in the yellow handbook to the effect that the handbook reflects “established procedure regarding suspension of problem employees and termination for those who cannot conform to Company Policy,” as there was in the handbook at issue in Lukoski, 106 N.M. at 666, 748 P.2d at 509. Neither is there anything suggesting “that the enumerated conduct was the only basis for dismissal, and the rules were consistent with a termination-at-will policy.” Rowe, 473 N.W.2d at 275 (<HOLDING>). We find that there is no language in the

A: holding purely hearsay evidence that defendant was aware of requirement to report was insufficient to support finding of willful violation
B: holding evidence insufficient to support finding of implied contract
C: holding evidence insufficient to support conviction of attempted possession of a prohibited weapon
D: holding that although there was evidence of discrimination based on race there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of constructive discharge
B.