Principal Resources Corporation contracts with Quality Construction to build an addition to Principal's corporate office building. Quality contracts with Rite Supply Company for materials for the addition but refuses to pick up the materials. Meanwhile, Principal hires Skye, a certified public accountant, to work in its cost-accounting division as an employee, with no authority to hire or supervise others. Skye asks Theo, an outside experienced accountant, to advise her on certain accounting procedures but fails to pay Theo for the service. Principal also contracts with Uma, a salesperson, to solicit orders for its products in a designated territory. Uma obtains an order from Verity Industries, Inc., which is assured the order will be filled soon. But Uma does not follow through with the paperwork and fails to submit the order to Principal. Verity suffers a loss. Rite Supply, Theo, and Verity Industries claim Principal is liable under agency law. Discuss fully whether an agency relationship was created by Principal with Quality Construction, Skye, or Uma.

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.