A developer has 20 acres of real estate for a project. She has two projects to consider for the land. She can only select one project as both require all 20 acres. The developer is looking at a 10-year time frame for this investment. The expected cash flows from the projects are described below: PROJECT A: Apartments with retail space. The project will require $1,122,284.00 invested today, and an additional $800,000.00 in one year. The project will generate a cash flow of $250,000.00 in the second year. Cash flows will grow at 4.00% per year for the remainder of the 10-year project. The developer believes she can sell the property in year 10 for a cash flow of $3,000,000.00. PROJECT B: Upscale neighborhood The project will require $854,468.00 invested today, and will generate $200,000.00 in the first year. The cash flows from the project will DECLINE by 5.00% per year for the remainder of the 10-year project. The developer will not have any rights to the property at the end of the 10th year as the neighborhood will be fully developed. The developer wants a 15.00% return on his investments. Which project should the investor take

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.