Adams v. Uno Restaurants, Inc. FACTS: After several years of employment by defendant, while working his nighttime line cooking shift, Adams noticed that the kitchen floor of the restaurant was saturated with a foul smelling liquid coming from the drains. Adams left work complaining of illness and contacted the Department of Health about the drainage problem in the restaurant’s kitchen. Upon returning to the restaurant a few days later, Adams was ordered into his manager’s office. Adams was reprimanded for stealing a softball shirt and taking home a work schedule. A shouting match ensued and Adams was charged with disorderly conduct, however the charges were later dropped and have since been expunged from his record. Adams contends that he was unlawfully terminated only because he notified the Board of Health regarding the unsanitary kitchen conditions. ISSUE: Was Adams wrongfully terminated in violation of a state whistleblower statute? Why or why not?

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.

In which job role will you be creating e-papers, newsletters, and periodicals?

The stock of grommet corporation, a u.s. company, is publicly traded, with no single shareholder owning more than 5 percent of its outstanding stock. grommet owns 95 percent of the outstanding stock of staple inc., also a u.s. company. staple owns 100 percent of the outstanding stock of clip corporation, a canadian company. grommet and clip each own 50 percent of the outstanding stock of fastener inc., a u.s. company. grommet and staple each own 50 percent of the outstanding stock of binder corporation, a u.s. company. which of these corporations form an affiliated group eligible to file a consolidated tax return?