Bondholders often employ a variety of devices—including restrictive covenants in the company’s bond indenture agreements—to protect their interests and constrain the actions of shareholders and the firm’s managers. Which of the following are restrictive covenants often used to protect the firm’s bond value and bondholder wealth? Check all that apply. Provisions that require issuing new debt securities whenever interest rates drop below 5% Provisions that prohibit reducing the firm’s liquidity ratio below specified levels Provisions that require firing the firm’s CEO whenever the firm’s bond price decreases by more than 15% Provisions that prohibit the borrower from increasing debt ratios above specified levels In addition, potential bondholders may require a interest rate on the firm’s soon-to-be-issued bond as compensation for the risks that cannot be adequately protected against using the restrictive covenants.

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.