With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". a cause of action for wrongful discharge where an employee is terminated for refusing to commit an unlawful act for which the employee could be held personally liable. McGarrity v. Berlin Metals, Inc., 774 N.E.2d 71, 76 (Ind.Ct.App.2002). The Kelley Defendants assert that Ms. Treat does not claim that Henderson terminated her employment for refusing to commit an unlawful act but that, rather, she alleges that Henderson terminated her employment because she threatened to report his actions to Kelley management. Indeed, Ms. Treat admits that she told Henderson that she “would not operate with banks in such a fashion.” The Kelley Defendants thus argue that Ms. Treat’s wrongful discharge claim does not create any liability. See Bregin v. Liquidebt Sys., Inc., 2008 WL 150611 (N.D.Ind.) (<HOLDING>). The Kelley Defendants conclude that even if

A: recognizing that indiana courts do not extend the wrongful discharge exception to the employmentatwill doctrine to employees whose employment is terminated for whistleblowing or reporting their employers misdeeds
B: recognizing cause of action for wrongful discharge
C: holding that no commonlaw cause of action for a discharge in retaliation for reporting violations existed before passage of the wpa which thereafter became the exclusive remedy for an employee whose employment is terminated in retaliation for reporting an employers violation of the law
D: recognizing retaliatory discharge cause of action when plaintiff discharged for whistleblowing
A.