Kendell Adams owns a software development company. When he first launched his firm, he was carefully to hire employees who had the experience he was looking for, were good matches for the positions he had available, and could be properly supervised. As Kendell's firm has grown, and his need for employees has increased, he is finding that it is increasing difficult to find employees who have the qualifications he is looking for, are good matches for the positions he has available, and fit within the supervisory framework he has developed. Kendell is dealing with an issue referred to as:

A) adverse hazard
B) adverse selection
C) complicated hazard
D) ethical hazard
E) moral selection

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.