Your friend currently works as an accountant at a public accounting firm in the small town of beaver falls, pennsylvania. he is offered a job in washington, d. c. for $60,000. your friend calls you and tells you that he is excited about the new job offer, which gives him a raise from his current salary of $50,000. based on your knowledge of economics, you think that choose one: a. your friend most likely should not be quite so excited because the extremely high cost of living in washington, d. c. means his real salary increase will be less than he imagined. b. your friend has no reason to be excited because higher pay implies more job responsibilities and more working hours. c. your friend has reason to be excited because in a bigger city he will have more things to do and his higher salary will allow him to spend on those activities. d. your friend has every reason to be excited because he will be getting paid 120% of what he used to be paid.

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court. the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center. because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.