有三个法律英语的案例,麻烦用英语回答一下,Case1:Tim,wholivesinPennsylvania,hassclaimfor$100againstCarl,wholivesinOhio.Carlrefusestopay,andTimwishestobringanactionagainsthiminafederalcourt,maintainingthat

Question

有三个法律英语的案例,麻烦用英语回答一下,
Case 1:
Tim,who lives in Pennsylvania,has s claim for $ 100 against Carl,who lives in Ohio.Carl refuses to pay,and Tim wishes to bring an action against him in a federal court,maintaining that he would not get justice if he sued Carl in local state court.
Can Tim bring his action in a federal court?Why?
Case 2:
A made a contract with B,which provides A pays $2,000 to B and B deliver the air-conditioner to A.Then B assigned his contractual rights to C.If B does not deliver the air-conditioner to A,whether does A have defenses against C’s claim for payment?Why?
Case 3:
The facts of this case was that the defendant (the owner) entered into a contract with two plaintiff companies for the construction and enclosure of a swimming pool in his garden for a price of $ 70,178.The contract expressly provided that the maximum depth of the pool was to be 7ft 6in.When the work was completed the owner observed that the maximum depth was only 6ft 9in.Further,where people had hoped to dive in the depth was only 6ft deep.The owner had paid various sums in advance but owed $ 39,072.The builders sued for this amount and the owner counter-claim for breach of contract.The owner considered that the only method of curing the defect was to demolish the existing pool and construct a new one.While the judge at first instance found that the value of the pool had not been diminished by the breach and that the pool as constructed was safe to dive into.The judge considered that the cost of rebuilding was wholly disproportionate to the disadvantage of having a pool of a depth shallower than that contracted for.So the judge held that the owner was entitled to $ 2,500 damages for loss of amenity which should be reduced form the remaining amount of $39,072 the owner owed to the plaintiffs.
The owner appealed contending that the judge should have awarded damages for the breach or deducted a sum from the contract price to reflect the need for the pool to be reconstructed to the depth specified in the contract.The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal,finding that it was reasonable to award damages to take into account the cost of replacing the pool in order to make good the breach of contract,despite the fact that the pool was still usable and that the breach had not diminished the value of the pool.The plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court..
Questions:
1.What’s the main legal issue in this case?
2.What kind of performance the plaintiffs had made?
3.Assume to be the judge of this case,whose claim you will confirm?Why?

Answer 1

case 1
no,because they live in different states, so this is a case invovling diversity jurisdiction. while cases brought under diversity jurisdiction theory must meet minimum amount requirement, which is at least one thousand(不记得具体多少钱). in this case ,the amount involving is only 100. as a result, .
仅凭记忆所写,不保证准确.