Assume the same facts as in No. 10, above. Assume further (1) Buck was temporarily working in California but actually lived in New Mexico; and (2) Buck led his lawsuit in the federal court in Los Angeles, because that court hears disputes involving incidents that happen in Bakerseld. If PlantMasters moves to dismiss the lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds, how will the federal court likely rule? 0 No answer text provided. 0 A. The court will rule that the issues presented do not present application of federal law, and thus, it lacks federal question jurisdiction. 0 B. The court will rule that the amount in controversy is sufcient to allow it to hear the case. 0 C. The court will rule that because Bucky and Petrochemicals are citizens of different states, the court has diversityjurisdiction. O D. Both B and C are correct. State law prohibits leaving young children unattended in an automobile. Mandy leaves her ve-year old son Clinton in the parking lot of a convenience store, Circle 7, while she runs in to purchase an e-cigarette. Suddenly, while Martha is at the checkout counter, Clinton climbs out of his car seat, opens the car door, and jumps on a skateboard another shopper named Mark left on the sidewalk outside the store. Clinton loses balance very quickly, the board ips, hits, dents and scratches Gino's brand new $650,000 Ferrari parked in the Circle 7 lot. To repair the scratch and dent will cost at least $25,000. Gino sues Mandy claiming that she was negligent per se because of the statute prohibiting leaving a child unattended in an automobile. At the conclusion of the case against her, Mandy moves for a directed verdict in her favor on Gino's claim of negligence per se. Should the court grant the motion? 0 No answer text provided. 0 A. No, because Gino has established negligence per se based on Mandy's violation of statute. O B. No, because the jury might nd it was foreseeable that Mandy's son could cause damage to cars in the parking lot if Mandy left him alone and unattended. O C. Yes, because Gino cannot show that the statute he relies on was designed to prevent children from causing damage to property. 0 D. Yes, because a parent is not vicariously liable for the negligence of herchd