In Guz V Bechtel National, Where Guz Sued for Breach of an of an Implied

In Guz v. Bechtel National, where Guz sued for breach of an implied contract to be terminated only for good cause and for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing after he was fired by Bechtel National during a time of high profits, the supreme court held that Bechtel could:

A) fire Guz without reason because he had not worked for Bechtel for more than 25 years
B) not fire Guz without reason because he had worked for them for over 20 years
C) fire Guz without cause because there was insufficient evidence of an implied contract of continued employment
D) not fire Guz without cause because there was clear evidence of an implied contract of continued employment
E) none of the other choices are correct